They Did post a jet Trials warning to boaters. So just testing?

He was knighted.

it would stuff the bow in 2 seconds with any kind of swell lol

​@@ct1762Also, oceans are salt water, turbines & salt don't mix👍✌️

Hi Mark pls message me on facebook

As Dave Warby's father Ken proved you only need one engine...what is this boat you mention ?

@@MusicPaulAlessi I think he's talking about the Caspian Sea Monster, a ground-effect vehicle developed by the Soviet Union in the 60s-70s

@@ccx806 It's not exactly a boat since it hasn't the water drag as it flies a few meters above the water

This explains all en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_speed_record

The world unlimited Water Speed Record is the officially recognised fastest speed achieved by a water-borne vehicle, irrespective of propulsion method.

You can ask the same question about the land-speed record, which was set by a jet-powered vehicle If the wheels aren't driven by the engine, is it actually a car?

@@ccx806 The Outright Land Speed Record, currently stands at 763.035 mph(1227.985 km/h),, but there are hundreds of other records in myriad classes based on factors such as engine type and capacity, weight or body shape. and of course wheel driven or not wheel driven, .....it has wheels and "carries'" a driver therefore it is a "car'...do your research

Ha,ha, would need bigger balls than the driver .

Thank you very much for your observations I will try and pass this along to the team !!!!!!

Two subsequent attempts at the record in 1980 and 1989 killed the drivers

Either Ken Warby was a genius or very lucky. His boat rocked on the water due to the rear aerofoil.

Thanks for listening

The original boat also had a T-tail.

That's for sure! I gave up boats after a 170mph crash & have gone in pursuit of 500 with a piston engine car.

@@nzsaltflatsracer8054 yeah, i dont blame you lol

I've almost broken my back falling into the water while waterskiing at 30 mph... I cant imagine 230. Best case scenario (perfectly feet first) that is 55,199 pound-force of drag. Worst case (forward bellyflop) that is 769,421 pound-force of drag. That is literally like having a 747 on you. the deceleration is instant, and so is your resulting death.

@@nzsaltflatsracer8054 170mph crash ,you are lucky to survive mate. I did over 150 mph in my old GT falcon and after it I really thought about doing again. Did it in an old Chrysler 360 and no more especially now I'm older makes you realize how much balls you blokes have to keep trying. Hats off to you sir.

@@petergoodwin2465 Bonneville Speed Week starts tomorrow & I'll be 71 by the time it's finished. Don't grow up mate, it's a trap!

Mmmeehhhhh

Hi, I am just a fan and spectator, please direct any technical enquiries direct to the team at facebook.com/warbymotorsport.

Like your good self Ive looked at this boat with concern . The boat I designed 5 or so years ago with 2 Rolls Royce Viper 632 ( type) engines running wet (one per sponson) had a closed loop system which controlled pitch by sensing pressure at contact points of the hull , computed the information to control the ailerons and return the degree of pitch to the onboard computers in order to learn the conditions at each contact point , this would mean that the pitch was under full control continually with a computer for confirmation and back up and the ability to perform a neutral function by running a default programme to slow the craft controllably should a failure occur . Pretty much like a pressure fuel map in a vehicle ECU . The choice of 2 small but very powerful engines was to control roll and yaw by the same method reducing manual rudder input at lower speed and rudder trim at higher speed pretty much like the software used in a Lear jet . Having noted that drag boats in the US were pushing 285 mph in a few seconds over a short course with very unsophisticated kit, short hulls , high CoG piston engines. I set a design speed at a doable 500 mph and designed the frame and spars factoring in the same safety as one would design a military aircraft ( somewhat less than a commercial aircraft) , having chosen composite ,ply and aluminium for the most suitable locations , as the structural materials , the local boat builders having experience in all three . 2 engines ? Its much easier to build far more responsive fuel and ignition system today that those that came with the surplus engines particularly during reheat . It was simply a very low flying aircraft that maintained contact with the water and could float when stationary and get up on plane easily designed around the compulsory safety tub . Symmetrical NACA profiles were chosen throughout for rudder empenage and ailerons between 'fuselage' and sponsors the weight distribution was to place CoG at 30% of chord of the main lift surfaces as it was to maintain a neutral attitude at speed . The tub formed the front of the central 'fuselage' in many aspects similar to the SSC but with a higher beam the length ratio and would break away cleanly should any rapid change in pressure gradient occur at the front secondary pitot by lifting off or submarining without contacting the rest of the craft . After acquired the engines and commissioned the tub and the control hardware at my own expense and the local boat builders in my port happy to throw in their lot and expertise , Cardiff and my local University on board , the larger sponsors had already committed to the 'Bloodhound' project which not long after my approach went bankrupt . To me I felt that it was more important to recover the record for the UK as we already had the LSR in the bag . The Macchi 632s were sold at a profit and much of the aircraft hardware too . The tub is still in the boatyard and has a gaming console in it now !

@@georgerobartes2008 Hi, I am just a fan and spectator, please direct any technical enquiries direct to the team at facebook.com/warbymotorsport

A very good idea but it needs to behave like the air brakes on Bloodhound SSC. The make the craft stable again and pointing in the right direction, the flaps need to be at the back of the craft and they would need to be pretty big.

When you need two more these engines :D

Thanks mate much appreciated, pretty sure Ronnie liked it too.

1 engine. Google can answer your other questions

I believe the engine is a Rolls Royce Orpheus 803. It's good for about 5,000 lbs of thrust, which would equate to about 9,000 hp (there is no exact equivalent for jet engines to horsepower). There is no afterburner but it doesn't need one. Ken Warby used a Westinghouse J-34 which was even less powerful but outright power is less important than keeping the boat on the water. Craig Arfons was using a General Electric J-79 with and afterburner , which was much more powerful but also unsuccessful, Arfons losing his life in the crash.

That's a RR 803 engine which develops 4.8 hp at full rpm. Its using liquid paraffin.

@@thethirdman225 I believe Lee Taylor's Discovery II used a rocket engine

@@ccx806 Could be. But from my perspective, outright power is less important than maintaining control. That and a good measure of luck!

We liked Evel over here in Oz as well, he took an young Aussie guy Dale Buggins under his wing at one stage, I was lucky enough to see Dale do an awesome jump in New Zealand abt 1977.