RC Surveillence Boat

[slowride]

This was in the FlaToday newspaper today

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011311290027

[Steven Vaccaro]

Very cool

[Rumdog]

lol. Looks more like 25mph, not 100. Who in thier right mind would drive a 6 foot cat at 100 mph with a cell phone???? I bet if I shot it with a gun, it would sink.

[m4a1usr]

I guess these guys have not done too much research into the various ROV/UAV programs the DOD has? There is at least a dozen surface vehicles, many different drifter versions and a few bottom crawlers and a couple that actually can fly and go submersable (all in one vehicle) that I have seen or read about. And they are just passive Intel gatherers. A/C, Satelites, Subs and SEALS do the real work and are 100% effective. Toy boats are unreliable, big ROV's cost too much. We just ahd the worlds most advanced UAV (the cost is rumored to be about $250 million) become lost to Iran and completely intact. These guys might think they have a vehicle that suits some mission requirements but the truth is they are just discovering what already exsists in current inventory.

John

[Fluid]

The faster models can reach over 130 MPH

Now where have I heard this before....


.

[Boaterguy]

I don't think a 6 ft boat could carry a person at 130 mph, especially for a significant quantity of time.

[Alexgar]

I think we are in the wrong bussiness 50000$ rc boat

[graill]

I just spent the better part of a day with some folks in procurement explaining to them the whos is and where they need to go in reference to FE or gas boats. You guys that have the businesses need to be proactive as i hate to see my military buddies snookered by half assed untruthful results and statements, like those shown in that article. I even emailed the paper for more info on what they were told by these people.

You folks that have the experience wanting to make a buck need to contact military PAO and present facts and figures and educate the folks that may be potentially buying hyped crap. I am still waiting on names from these companies and when i get them i will post them. lets get some of these big name folks to push their weight and get this hobby hi profile now as SME's or advisors for the military or private companies. The only requirement is you know your *!***!***!***!** very very well. Do not let opportunties pass you by.

[JIM MARCUM]

I wouldn't worry too much about the procurement officer or the Navy getting ripped off. I spent 24 years as a civillian Navy Contract Specialist, and Management Analyst here in San Diego, and have managed contracts with Master Ship Repair & Construction contractors. The Navy's military & Civil Service engineers & contract folks are not stupid. The claims made by this company appear to be greatly overstated, and thier boat overpriced. But $50K ain't squat in this business. If the SEALs want to test the functionality of this boat, let them have one. There may be circumstances where this would prove useful. But, I doubt the Navy will make this Floridian rich anytime soon. JIM

[graill]

i have dealt with the same folks at aberdeen, Hood, Knox and a few in germany. There is the stars in the eyes thing that the SME's need to arrest before the folks that use this, whether it is army or navy.

I am already talking to army procurement as i stated. I know what things the troopies do and how they think, perhaps you navy folks have more common sense than what i have witnessed in the past, a prime reason SME's like myself were used, to bring the end user back to reality.

Here is a small full context email from the makers of these boats "The smaller version of this hull (4') has multiple documented runs in the 104 - 106 mph range.", The bulk of the email goes on to explain to me how they have the patent on the hull design and quote: "The prototype craft in that we use for most demonstrations tops out at 48 knots which is around 56 mph. We have a sistership hull with higher capacity engines/batteries that runs around 100. One of our riggers with his group called to say they hit 127 mph with a max effort version earlier this fall. This boat has also been run in multiple turbine configurations." endquote.

I will be talking to Mr Hansen tomorrow by phone. Should be interesting.

[graill]

The thing with newspapers and people with no knowledge of a certain subject is that they tend to believe what they are told. I will be talking with Mr Hansen again to clarify a statement. Still i would like to point out to the folks that may read this board that are involved. It isnt a big investigation nor a witch hunt and right now i wont name names, though i have nearly all involved. Telling a potential client that a product will do something when it will not is fraud in my eyes, bending the facts to suit your needs or slightly modifying something to back up statements and sell something is also fraudulant when the facts and the math and practical application do not work well together. So this is an FYI for anyone involved, the end user products will be going out to our troops in the USA, i will be damned if anyone thinks i will let some backwards ass yahoo with stars in their eyes supplying bad metrics to try and make a buck.

I could really care less about the contract, there is only one matter, well two, that the vendor is truthfull and the price is honest. And i am not referencing Mr. Hansen on these points.

Have a Merry Christmas Folks, will keep you updated, or if Steve finds this is to volatile a thread he can close it as i will fill him in on the potential problems.