Olo of the Sun, a 19 foot pintail

nice veranda you're putting in there.

Good to see you are pushing the boundaries of board design and trying something different from everyone else, I guess. I enjoy looking at different shapes and trying to figure out why they have certain design elements or how the shapes would influence performance, especially on my own boards. So I was more then interested to look over your website, but some of the things left me puzzled,or questioning my understanding of how I thought a board works.

I think I remember from your previous posts you design these boards to flow with the wave, as opposed to skimming over the surface a la modern surfboards. I get the concept of control from a thin tail design and efficiency of the glide from a narrow board in relation to length, but I'm stuck with the concept of "rail to rail ease which works mostly in displacement". Displacement means the board is going less then planing speed? Don't all boards have rail to rail ease when going slow (ie. they tip easily)? Also, I thought heavily rockered boards were slow to get going, yet you state that will help early planing. Is this due to the rocker being located further forwards? What do you mean by cantered towards the horizon? Do you mean trimming the board flat? Surely that is the most efficient position for any board.

Sorry for all the questions, just trying to get my head around it all. Is it that the increased length that has some part to play in the whole equation? Kinda like the really old surf lifesaver hollow wooden boards around the 19ft mark. I imagine you just can't take a modern planshape and stretch it to 19ft without some detrimental affect.

Cheers

Clovus