MAAS Aero to a racing shell comparison
Zbigniew A.
Aero against a normal flat water racing shell. I know Aero is slower.
But how much, really? In seconds.
--
Zibi
A. Dumas
On a 2 km long glass-water lake? Two minutes. On a choppy see? Equally slow.
sully
Depends on the athletes' sculling abilities and strength, race
ratings, duration.
For top level scullers, I'd say about one minute over 2k. For
people still in their
first year of sculling, for some masters, etc, an aero is likely to
be faster.
So if a sculler can go 7:20 2k in his single, he can go 8:20 in an
Aero, I've not
tested this, this has been my observation running workouts where I
will sometimes
have athletes race in aeros (or in tub wherry pairs for pairs
workouts).
MagnusBurbanks
I've often heard rowers say "ah hull shape who cares? they're all long
and thin so it makes no difference." Looking up pictures of this Maas,
it also seems long and thin, OK appreciably fatter than a racing
single but same general type.
So observing such a huge difference in speed for such an oft-dismissed
difference in hull shape completely puts that argument to rest. Hull
shape makes a tremendous difference to speed.
Given there are very noticeably different fat-sterned, fat-bowed and
symmetrical boats out there in the racing shell world, there must be
advantages and disadvantages of which the boat-users are completely
unaware, no?
A. Dumas
> "A. Dumas" wrote:
>> Zbigniew A. wrote:
>>> I wonder if someone has a real field-test data on a comparison of MAAS
>>> Aero against a normal flat water racing shell. I know Aero is slower.
>>> But how much, really? In seconds.
>> On a 2 km long glass-water lake? Two minutes. On a choppy see? Equally slow.
>
> So observing such a huge difference in speed for such an oft-dismissed
> difference in hull shape completely puts that argument to rest. Hull
> shape makes a tremendous difference to speed.
To be fair, I pulled those numbers out of my arse. Might be a bit less
than 2 minutes. (And sea, not see. D'oh.)
Carl Douglas
Please don't forget that, at peak speed as well as at intermediate speed
steps, the wave drag (too often ignored in back of envelope calcs) has
important effects.
Wavelength is proportional to square root of speed (which is why
tsunamis have huge wavelengths in deep water & travel at several 100
mph). So a shorter boat has a lower speed at which it hits the surge in
wave drag caused as the stern-wave starts to drop back from the stern.
While wave drag is normally a relatively minor component of overall
drag, it is not insignificant. As you approach what is loosely termed
"hull speed" it can quickly add several percent to overall drag, & this
hits the shorter hull sooner than the longer one.
When racing in rough water, or of a limited standard as a sculler, your
speeds will be slower than those of a good sculler on flat water in a
racing shell. Under those conditions the shorter shell may benefit from
having a lower wetted surface than the longer, narrower boat by
requiring less power to sustain a given speed. That helps to explain
why the shorter boat can keep up nicely as 2 good scullers paddle on
flat water at moderate pressure but gets dropped as the pressure builds.
Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: http://tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: ca...@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)
Zbigniew A.
>[...]
> For top level scullers, I'd say about one minute over 2k. For
> people still in their
> first year of sculling, for some masters, etc, an aero is likely to
> be faster.
>
> So if a sculler can go 7:20 2k in his single, he can go 8:20 in an
> Aero, I've not
> tested this, this has been my observation running workouts where I
> will sometimes
> have athletes race in aeros (or in tub wherry pairs for pairs
> workouts).
>
Hei sully, thanks for the info!
This weekend we have a regatta. And i wanted to do such a test during
this regatta, but because of really crazy winds it turned out to be
impossible. However, i still want to make such a test in a near future,
perhaps next weekend, and then i will report my observation.
--
Yours Virtualy, Zibi
sully
Thanks, Zibi, I'd love to see results.
Zbigniew A.
At last!
Finally, all the right conditions came together and i made the tests. In
a *very* low wind conditions (1 m/s crosswind) i sculled two boats on
albano course: MAAS Aero and a regular racing Empacher. I tried two
different intensities.
First a medium intensity 1000m with a flying start:
MAAS Aero 4:30, racing single 4:10
Second, high intensity 500m from normal start:
MAAS Aero 2:06, racing single 1:56
So, both tests would suggest a difference about 40 seconds in a 2k
distance.
--
Yours Virtually, Zibi
sully
Great! thanks for the test.
ATP
"sully" <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:52b5a65c-0e3b-4b37...@s41g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
********************
Is it safe to say, then, that the Maas 24 would be slightly closer to the
racing shell? The time differences seem like they would be huge in
competition but not that significant for a recreational sculler. But I am
probably missing something.
Mike
sully
> "sully" <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I'm guessing the "24" will be ahead of the Aero in the tests above,
but closer
to the Aero than to the single.
I have used the Aero a lot, but rarely the "24".
Zbigniew A.
>
> Please don't forget that, at peak speed as well as at intermediate speed
> steps, the wave drag (too often ignored in back of envelope calcs) has
> important effects.
Carl, you are right at the point here!
These days it happened to me to scull the MAAS Aero on a completely calm
waters, something that probably people don't do very often :-), and i
could observe the wave of wake behind my boat. It could be easily seen
with a naked eye, even at the moderate "just cruisin'" speed.
When sculling bit faster, it would be so strong that could disturb other
scullers on a normal boats.
--
Yours Virtually, Zibi
sully
We had a small group of Masters that were training together to get one
of them
ready for some racing he was going to do in Peru last winter.
They took a 3 mile piece, and Dave, who is slightly faster over
distances in his single,
was rowing an Aero. He asked for an "Aero" lead then parked his boat
so the
competing sculler's bow would catch the Aero wake, basically having
the effect
of making him have to scull "uphill".
The trailing sculler couldn't figure out to go very wide and make an
aggressive sprint
to get past the wake, so ended up rowing a very unsatisfying 3 mile
piece! :^)
Prairierowing
gsl...@gmail.com
>I've often heard rowers say "ah hull shape who cares? they're all long
>and thin so it makes no difference." Looking up pictures of this Maas,
>it also seems long and thin, OK appreciably fatter than a racing
>single but same general type.
That would be ~70% wider, ~20-25% shorter, and ~30% heavier than a typical racing shell. I would not classify it as the same general shape. It is a much slower boat.
>I'm guessing the "24" will be ahead of the Aero in the tests above,
>but closer to the Aero than to the single.
I have only rowed a "24" once, it was a long 2 hour row. It felt really good at steady state--stable with a lot of run but when I pushed it hard at a high rate it felt pretty slow. If I was only doing steady state recreational rows, I would be happy with a 24 but not with an Aero. An Aero feels slow and heavy even going easy.
I do have a lot of experience in the Maas Flyweight, which I would also say is much closer to a racing shell than the aero. I it like quite a bit. It just a tad small for me but I like it a lot more than the Maas Single. I think because I am rather small for it. Sully said he likes the Maas Single a lot, but he has ~6" and several stone on me.
For comparison:
The Maas Aero: 19" wide at the water line, 21'3" (39 lbs/35 for carbon model)
The Maas 24: 14" wide at the water line, 24' long. (39/36)
The Maas Flyweight: 12" wide and 24'1" long and (35/32)
The Maas Single: 12" wide, 27' 1" (35 lbs)