Mike and all interested...

Perhaps the issues of the outrigger-equipped kayak, as opposed to the canoe, reside in the over-arching philosophical issues of kayaks, themselves and how the members of this fabulous forum view them?

I would suggest that there is a very real emotional connection that most members of the forum have to their kayaks, as well as their efforts to actually "kayak' when out on the water. This emotional response is deeply engrained in the psyche of the assembled paddlers and that is very well understood. There's a "classic sense" that many paddlers have, a gut feeling, if yo will, that their sport and how they engage it, are of the purest of experiences.

It is only natural that kayakers would see any dilution of their expression, any side bar take on how that might look, would become a possible infringement of the kayaking experience as they know it.

When it comes to setting up a kayak with an outrigger (whatever the purpose might be) there is an resistance to the process. Interestingly enough, it's perfectly OK for a canoe to be equipped in said fashion, as that is not where the emotional connection resides. It's all about the purity of the kayaking experience.

I do understand that practice... I just don't see it as differential. I look at the hulls and the shape of same. I recognize them for what they are... marvelous, potential, floating objects with huge potential in many applications well beyond that which has been established by industry norms.

There is no recognized reality that states that kayaks need to be shaped in the same fashion to be effective. A hundred plus years of organized, naval architecture studies would tell you so, as well as the evidence of dozens of designers who have stepped out of the known comfort zone to design boats that look different, though they behave very much within the accepted norms.

This transition of modern understandings, compared to traditional means, would say to the observer that there is more than one way to skin the cat... and do it successfully. Take a look at the boats used by known fast paddlers such as Olympic Medallist, Greg Barton. Ask yourself why does he not use a kayak that looks like the one that I paddle in the same conditions. The reason is performance, handling and overall usefulness for the purpose he has in mind. He’s not glued to the Greenland design esthetic. He’s glued to having the best boat possible for the conditions in which he will be paddling.

When one looks at the shapes of the hulls for traditional sailing boats, as opposed to the shapes of the modern craft that currently set the standard, one sees that there are significant changes in the forms that give inherent performance advantages. This is the result of form development and not an accidental development that took place over hundreds of years of use, as it was in the past.

Kayak design and application is going through a similar transition.

There is nothing wrong with utilizing a traditional looking kayak. One only need recognize that there are literally, hundreds of newer design studies that have been done to address the same issues present and the shapes derived from those studies, in some cases, have made a departure from the traditional.

The process of adding amas and outrigger connections, as well as sail rigs, is but one of those expressions which expand the potential of a kayak beyond the established and accepted, norms.

You will see more and more of these expressions in the future. You may just find yourself benefiting from the process at one point and I can only wish you well as you discover the full range of possibilities of your boating experience.