Quicksilver

Post Reply
quicksilver-wsr
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:29 pm

Re: Quicksilver

Post by quicksilver-wsr » Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:10 pm

I was glad to be invited to put the record straight on certain things, because there is disinformation circulating that makes no-one look good - neither me nor the people who are generating it. In some ways I have been an easy target, partly because my project has taken an awful long time to come together and therefore attracts a certain degree of suspicion, and partly because I've just been too busy working on my project to devote time to putting out fires that other people have deliberately started.

Having said that, I am perfectly prepared to concede that, by not standing up for myself - for whatever reason - I have allowed a vacuum to develop which others have felt compelled to fill.

So, all in all, maybe I have a responsibility to face my critics and answer as many questions as time allows.

The first one concerns my bankruptcy, which people need to be aware was a voluntary move on my part. I was not "struck off" as some people have stated. I resigned my position in the Quicksilver management company beforehand and it was all done in a very orderly and correct fashion. This recession is not just a collection of statistics that keep the TV news channels happy, it is a real state of affairs that has a genuine effect on the lives of real people - and I am one of them.

I was discharged from bankruptcy on 28 October, after only seven-and-a-half months. The reason it was so brief was that I had done nothing illegal and did not profit in any way from what happened. Two team members carried on the official duties I had been dealing with, but that did not mean that I ceased to be involved in the Quicksilver project. It just meant that I was no longer involved with the company. But my involvement with the project as a whole continued.

I hope that puts the record straight on that issue and look forward to addressing other misunderstandings that have arisen.

Let me close, for now, since this is my first posting, by congratulating everyone who is working on the Bluebird restoration project on the brilliant job they are all doing. The work is a credit to them and it is a marvellous example of how history can be brought to life for the benefit of everybody.

User avatar
Renegadenemo
Posts: 4926
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England
Contact:

Re: Quicksilver

Post by Renegadenemo » Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:12 am

Welcome Nigel - good to have you aboard. You're amongst friends in here mate.
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

"As to reward, my profession is its own reward;" Sherlock Holmes.

'Sometimes you gotta be an S.O.B if you wanna make a dream reality' Mark Knopfler

turbocox
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:06 pm
Location: Milk 'n' Beanz

Re: Quicksilver

Post by turbocox » Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:49 pm

Yeah! what they ^^^^^^^ said! :D

(Sorry but I was going to post something simalar :roll: )

Keep pushing on, and as Bill says eventually you'll find theres only one thing left to do.. Put it inthe water a see what she can do :D

Good luck chap! Bring that Record back to where it belongs.
All men dream: but not equally,Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible.

jonwrightk7
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:53 pm
Location: sandbach cheshire

Re: Quicksilver

Post by jonwrightk7 » Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:40 pm

the best of british to you! hope your bulldog spirit pervails! :P
The world is full of Kings and Queens; who blind your eyes, then steal your dreams..

User avatar
Renegadenemo
Posts: 4926
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England
Contact:

Re: Quicksilver

Post by Renegadenemo » Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:52 am

Well hello, Ernie! Where have you been hiding all this time, and good to have you back...

At least you were back albeit briefly. I read your posting and in the time it took me to pen a reply it had gone but in answer to your question about whether or not the original, Norris designed Quicksilver was a three or four-point boat I'd have said that one planing area split into two (as you suggest) - and when you consider that K7's planing shoes only penetrated the surface 1/16th of an inch or so - equals two planing areas and therefore a four-point craft. Perhaps a hacksaw cut between them would resolve the matter...

Anyway, never mind the bankruptcy, Nigel. I mean, that's a rite of passage for anyone of any stature these days. Something to be worn as a badge of honour. How's the bloody boat coming on? that's all we want to know.
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

"As to reward, my profession is its own reward;" Sherlock Holmes.

'Sometimes you gotta be an S.O.B if you wanna make a dream reality' Mark Knopfler

f1steveuk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:01 pm
Location: Belves France and Brighton UK

Re: Quicksilver

Post by f1steveuk » Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:49 pm

Image

The first Norris Bros Quicksilver K9, definitely a four pointer. Basically K7 with the front sponsons enlarged and moved to the rear, and smaller versions of the sponsons mounted either side of the cockpit. Ken's way of increasing the "stability triangle".
Steve Holter, UK and France, and sometimes reality....................

quicksilver-wsr
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:29 pm

Re: Quicksilver

Post by quicksilver-wsr » Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:51 pm

First of all, let's clear up (a little bit) the issue of whether the boat designs inspired by Ken Norris, post-Donald Campbell, were or were not four-pointers. I am emphatic that they all were four-pointers, and this is certainly how Ken himself defined each and every one of them, and it was a really major factor in Ken's vision for a new boat.

Bill, you are on the right track with what you say. Ernie, you are definitely off-beam with this one, but since you are such a nice chap, I can't chastise you.

When I get a minute, I'll post something explaining why these boat concepts were all four-pointers. And it's not a matter of mere technicalities. It is a straightforward matter of fact that all of these boat concepts had four points of contact with the water in the planing condition.

Now, to turn to the subject of the K7-lookalike boat illustrated in the most recent posting. That is not the first Ken Norris Quicksilver design. It is the second. The first is the one illustrated in one of the recent news items on the Quicksilver website, when I was answering questions for an interviewer about the early days of our project. This was the design Ken had in mind even before Donald was killed. It is a boat designed along the lines of the CN7 car, and the philosophy was very interesting indeed.

This was the project I teamed up with Ken to do, way back in the winter of 1988. That was the start of what became the Quicksilver project. It was to build "The Bluebird That Never Was". Unfortunately, it didn't work - not properly. That''s another story that I will try to illuminate in a later post.

So then there was a period of time when we, I felt, lost our way a little bit, by letting a group of Southampton University students devise their own concept for a four-pointer, with Ken's guidance. I became alarmed, as I had teamed up with Ken Norris, not a group of students, so Ken came up with the K7-lookalike to keep me happy - but then the students got upset that there were now two Quicksilver concepts running in parallel, so the four-point K7 idea was swiftly abandoned.

That led the way for the boat we are best known for - the rear-sponsoned one that, sadly, we eventually felt we must abandon as well. But that, again, is another story for later.

Even this brief outline hopefully gives some clue as to the difficult route we have travelled on our project. It is incredibly hard to find a winning concept - a boat that will be safe at speeds as high as 400mph.

One final point for now. The K7-lookalike was not a Norris Brothers design. Lew had nothing to do with any of the concepts Ken and I worked on together over the 12-year period that we collaborated.

f1steveuk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:01 pm
Location: Belves France and Brighton UK

Re: Quicksilver

Post by f1steveuk » Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:35 pm

So if the first Quicksilver was designed BEFORE DMC met his end, it would have been a Bluebird, so "technically" the illustration IS the first Quicksilver from Norris Bros, as it was done for the project, not as a new Bluebird. I said Norris Bros, as it was using much of what was already known from K7, including the frame, so it was "technically" a Norris Bros design, albeit, adapted. Symantics I know, but it IS how Ken saw it. But definetly a four pointer! ;)
Steve Holter, UK and France, and sometimes reality....................

User avatar
Renegadenemo
Posts: 4926
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:29 pm
Location: N E England
Contact:

Re: Quicksilver

Post by Renegadenemo » Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:46 pm

The illustrated design would need an interesting spar arrangement to sneak under the engine. Nigel, how did the spars work on the rear-sponson QS design?
I'm only a plumber from Cannock...

"As to reward, my profession is its own reward;" Sherlock Holmes.

'Sometimes you gotta be an S.O.B if you wanna make a dream reality' Mark Knopfler

quicksilver-wsr
Posts: 1099
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:29 pm

Re: Quicksilver

Post by quicksilver-wsr » Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:34 pm

Hello, Steve - good to have your feedback. A bit of a mix-up has crept in there, though. Re-reading my earlier post, I see that it's as much me wording things in a way that can be misinterpreted as it is you grabbing the wrong end of the stick, so apologies for that.

If you look again carefully at what I wrote you will see that the first Ken Norris concept I referred to wasn't the K7-lookalike that you showed on your post. That four-pointer K7 idea came along much, much later.

Here it is, in a nutshell ...

Even while Donald was alive, the Norris Brothers - or, far more likely in this particular case, Ken alone - came up with a new idea for a boat. Bill referred to discussions Donald had about a new Bluebird boat in a much earlier post, before I joined the forum. I don't think people have known, up until now, what that idea for a new Bluebird boat was. It was a boat designed along the lines of the Bluebird CN7 car! To get a feeling for this, form an image of CN7 in your mind's-eye and delete the four wheel-arches that protruded on the top surface and substitute them with four planing surfaces protruding from the bottom surface.

I sometimes refer to this as the "flying wing" boat, because that is really what it was. It is not the K7-looking boat that you showed. It is something totally different and it dates back to Donald's time. It was the "flying wing" that I teamed up with Ken to build, way back at the start of our collaboration in late 1988. I have also called this concept "The Bluebird That Never Was". The trouble was, we gave up on it after about two years or so because there were too many problems associated with it. It would be a little harsh to say it didn't work, but ... how else should I put it - it didn't work!

If you want to see that concept for yourself, go to the Quicksilver website and look at the recent news item in which I was answering an interviewer's questions about the early days of our project.

Ken envisaged this boat as an amphibian, capable of breaking the water-speed record and the wheel-driven land-speed record as well! You would fit wheels and a drivetrain in place of the planing surfaces and get two records with one machine!

I have never talked about this in public before, and the picture released on my website a few weeks back is the first time a picture of the "flying wing" Bluebird has been released. Not for any particular reason, just that I never got around to it.

The K7-lookalike boat that you showed, Steve, was much, much later - way after Donald died and way after the Norris Brothers ceased working as a duo on cars and boats. The K7-based concept - basically Donald's boat, but with four planing points instead of three - came into being in 1992, possibly late 1991, for the reasons explained in my last post.

Again, there were reasons why we didn't proceed with it.

Enough for now. I'll get back with more during the week and will also answer Bill's question about mounting sponson-arms on a boat that has sponsons at the back, with the engine in the way.

Post Reply