So, if you dont have enough lift at slow speed with short tunnel, and too much at high speed, why not put some tracks in and make the first 6' or so retractable? They are going for speed in good conditions, so its not like they need incrdibly quick transitions...
There is a tendency when designing a boat in a silo to make broad brush, knee jerk decisions to wit:
- Fear of lift.........cut back the tunnel
- Fear of stuffing.....put big wings on the forward entry areas
- Desire for light weight.....layup the hull with tissue paper laminates
- Need more speed............ wedge in ridiculous amounts of horsepower
- Fear of rough water handling woes.....Make the hull 100 feet long
- Fear of speed....adjustable gizmos to "stabilize the bow"
- Fear of being ignored.......$200,000 paint schemes, girls in bikinis, neon lights and fire works displays
In truth, guys like Switzer, Hledin, Staudacher, Schoel, Molinari, and Buzzi didn't learn boat designing on a bar stool. The key to successful designs are subtle changes of proven technology in anticipation of projected performance envelopes. Every now and then a hull comes along that nails it on the first go round (The Switzer wing, The 41' Apache, The Cougar Cat, Gancia de Gancia, etc) but the designs came from guys who had years of trial and error to hone their design skills. The Phenomenon looks to have come from a clean sheet of paper....... but who did the drawing? I am not trying to knock anybody's effort here, simply asking a question.
Perhaps the boat will fly like an eagle, and thereby vindicate the design team. So far it has managed to eat its own props, and run into a dock. These are not the hallmarks of the early tests of the Switzer Wing, the Miss US, The Apache Heritage, Gancia de Gancia, or even the original (and amazing) Popeye's four engine superboat; hence my suggestion that they seek outside help with this complex project, (and perhaps they already have done just that).
I sincerely hope it makes it to the top. Big Al's legacy deserves that.
T2x