Group: Super Administrators
Joined: Jan. 2004
||Posted: Aug. 22 2005,08:47
Regarding Don's, uh, observations
Broze says it best:
|"What matters most is how the paddle feels to the paddler. In an attempt to discover or design the paddle that worked best for me, I experimented with many different paddles, and made numerous changes in the blades...what is most important to me is moving a fast sea kayak over long distances at near hull speed in all conditions. My style of paddling and choice of paddles is intended to minimize wear and tear on my ligaments and joints (while achieving his goal).|
That's good enough for me. Matt Broze is a well respected, very experienced kayaker and not infrequent contributor to Sea Kayaker Magazine (which is as close to a bible or journal of our sport that exists). Along with Chris Cunningham, Editor, these two fellows know their stuff. They have forgotten more about kayaking and paddling than we will ever know.
From a perfectly scientific basis I'm sure we could come up with a million permutations or combinations of features that would no doubt require a supercomputer and a team of dedicated researchers who - with enough time and millions of dollars, I'd suspect - would come up with a scientifically impressive piece of... Crap. Like a space shuttle with loose foam.
You get the idea. Like Thomas Edison or our Eskimo forefathers successful kayak design has emerged not from scientific brute force, but from painstaking life experience and determination. The Eskimo designed kayaks - using their own body to measure and rudimentary materials and tools - and based on experience and experimention over thousands of years. Much of what they did could not and still cannot be scientifically quantified. Yet their designs remain to this day as some of the best performing sea kayaks you can find, period. Their hard won designs work and work very, very well.
Broze and Cunningham come from this tradition of dedication and blend as scientific an approach as is possible in what is still essentially an art. They tinker, experiment, theorize and try things in real world, on-the-water, trial and error. Often they can't explain why something works, but they know it does. They live and breathe kayaking. None of us at this forum have the qualifications, experience or track record to really criticize their work. To do so amounts to the kind of armchair "musings" criticized above.
Truth be told, the failings, if any are mine. Broze could not possibly detail all his many experiments (which took years) in the limited space of a magazine article, but he did summarize them. And in the interest of brevity I chose not to detail the all the details he DID provide; rather I further summarized his findings and included only enough detail to give a flavor of his work. Didn't want anyone falling asleep. Still I believe his impressive findings stand.
We would all be well advised to pay attention.
And Don, regarding your criticism - yes, he did take into account that the sawtooth (and other) does not increase area - in fact, that was his objective - he wished to keep blade area the same to isolate the effect of differing perimeters (and types of perimeters). For what it's worth, that is a typical scientific approach. He found that perimeter alone had no significant effect.
Edited by Capn Jimbo on Aug. 22 2005,08:51
Link to FLYC Main Site
Link to Member Map
New Posts! (also top of page)