Craig Jungers wrote: > I think that there are other factors that could have resulted in such a > large difference. Prevailing winds, for one thing. How? If the winds affect the ruddered kayak, they affect an unruddered kayak. If the ruddered performs poorly in those winds unless the rudder is used and the unruddered is not so seriously affected, then the problem is the ruddered kayak and the solution is not the rudder. > But we'll never know for > sure until someone tries to replicate the data. Caffyn himself is adamant in > his defense of the rudder, however. He clearly feels that it made a huge > difference. And, since no one has ever done anything like what he did it's > hard to refute him. But you claimed Caffyn's data stands on its own. Clearly it doesn't. This is exactly what John's on about - the data is not collected properly. Caffyn hasn't isolated the rudder from other effects. Caffyn's subjective observations in the absence of any controls (like objective measurements, a kayak that doesn't need a rudder etc) means nothing to a person looking for an objective assessment of the performance of rudders. Mike *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************Received on Mon Jul 02 2007 - 07:14:57 PDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:31:25 PDT