: Hi Mick
: The missing piece of info I did not mention is that I also progressively
: reduced the Cp with each scale down. So I did not answer the question
: properly (mea culpa). Both the prismatic as well as the block cf's stay
: the same for any proportional scaling. Reducing length by 90% and keeping
: beam and draft constant reduces displacement by 90%. Any two dims reduced
: by 90% will reduce the displacement by (0.9^2) and so on. The block
: coefficient would thus never go to1 unless the whole yak fills the lxwxd
: block. Sorry about the confusion.

Hey Vaclav

Forget the mea, you've provided so much info and ideas that I think you're permanently excused. And I knew that I was missing something in the calcs.

: As far as the maximum capacity goes, I was speaking figuratively. This
: measure is definitely important but I consider it meaningless in the
: absence of other information. One may ask, what does it really mean?

When talking max capacity solely, it's probably mainly about squirts (and playboats slightly lesser extent) w/ just the paddler as the load. In this case solely, it's about restoring force to the surface.

: Is it
: OK to load the kayak to the max and expect it to behave well or will one
: extra pound just sink it.

The reason I walk around in such a hunched and shuffling manner is because of all the 1 lb wts I carry in anticipation of permanently helping many yaks out.

: The question to ask is: what is the sinkage,
: righting/heeling moments, maneuverability at max capacity. Prismatic
: coefficient matters when the kayak is loaded around the designed
: displacement because you can expect it to perform but when you get to the
: max it really doesn't play a role in speed as much as in seaworthiness.

One is not loaded to max capacity w/ these yaks, but one of the main questions is volume distribution.

I would guess that in these yaks, prismatic coeff is virtually meaningless.

-mick