Who was Harry Schoell? - Page 2

bigshrimpin · #11 06-14-2005, 04:18 PM

This article offers a general explanation as to why hunt lost the patent for the Deep V (perhaps lifting strakes too) . . . seeing that they were on in the 1958 drawings that were published in Boating Magazine.

http://www.bertram31.com/ray_hunt.htm

Hunt shunned the accolades that started coming his way and, as a result, some people considered him standoffish, Deknatel recalled. Meanwhile, other boat companies copied the deep-vee, and Hunt was unable to patent his idea. Drawings had appeared in a boating magazine early in 1958 as part of a story on the design. Patent rules stipulated that a patent application must be filed within a year after the invention has been written about or used - and Hunt had missed the deadline.

A phase of unsuccessful patent infringement suits followed, in which the oversight proved his undoing, Deknatel recalled.

bigshrimpin · #12 06-14-2005, 05:07 PM

Reel - I think you're right. Hunt probably encouraged a budding 18 year old engineer to patent one of his designs, so that he could protect the rights for Alim to use them on the steplift ????

The strakes were a HUNT design. The drawings that appeared in boating magazine clearly show strakes. The strakes appear on the 1958 prototype boat. The strakes appear on Moppie in the 1960 Miami to Nassau race. (even moppie was built before the patent was filed). I imagine that strakes were part of Hunts v20 design too . . . but who the heck knows.

We do know that Hunt could not patent them b/c of some stipulation in the law . . . otherwise Hunt would have patented the Deep V.

Anyway I look at it . . . I still see Harry Schoell as a fraudulent self promoter . . . he is taking credit for a design that was never his. He just happens to have the patent for it . . cause his dad owned Alim and worked with Ray Hunt.

There's a lot more to this story . . . than we're hearing from Schoell.

#13 06-14-2005, 05:33 PM

So in the end, who gets credit? Or is this another one of those issues where everyone picks a side and one side screams "TASTES GREAT!!!" while the other side screams "LESS FILLING!!!". ;D ;D ;D

In the meantime hopefully I'll get some supplies this week and begin hacking away at my Hunt designed / Schoell patented V20!!! 8) Will post some picks of new evidence of rotten transom soon! (I took off the aluminum strip at the top of the transom....not good!)

By the way, I enjoyed the history lesson. Although it would be nice to be able to definitivly give credit to the right person for a great design that has stood the test of time, I'll settle for just having a great boat!

bigshrimpin · #14 06-14-2005, 05:41 PM

Not to drag this out even further.

http://www.cowesclassic.com/previous-winners.htm

1961 pic of Moppie.

http://www.cowesclassic.com/1961winner.htm

Look like strakes to me!!

bigshrimpin · #15 06-14-2005, 05:46 PM

Also if anyone is interested . . . where the current Contender Hull originated . . . check out 1969.

reelapeelin · #16 06-14-2005, 07:03 PM

I saw a Contender in FL last week that sported THREE (3) 275 HP Verados.... :o 8)...apparently it has a LARGE fuel capacity... ::)...

bigshrimpin · #17 01-31-2006, 05:24 AM

He's another clip from www.crhunt.com where Richard Bertram recalls strakes on the bottom of Ray Hunts boat in July 1958.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.huntyachts.com/corp_testimonials.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Knifing through those six foot seas at thirty knots, this little 23 footer stopped every sailor in the fleet in their tracks. No one had ever seen power boat performance to approach it. I know I hadn’t.

“Before the preparatory gun sounded, I made a mental note to corner Ray after the race and get to the bottom of this amazing exhibition.

“I found that “getting to the bottom” was the right place to get for the answer. Ray explained that this new design was deep vee the entire length of the bottom. Other boats had had the vee bottoms before, of course, but the vee and the deadrise diminished to a flat, planing surface at the transom. (“Deadrise,” incidentally, is the angle the bottom makes with the horizontal.)

“Ray figured if he carried the deadrise and the vee clear to the transom, pounding would be practically eliminated. He also put longitudinal strakes on the bottom to give lift and throw spray out flat to keep the boat dry.

“He figured right. A demonstration ride the next day proved it. She ran straight and true, smoothing the seas cushion-soft. When we returned to the dock, we were as dry as when we left.

“I commissioned Ray to design a 31 footer for me.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.huntyachts.com/corp_about...evelopment.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many of Ray’s notes and sketches deal with variations of deadrise, loss of lift, addition of lift, and reduction of wetted area through the use of “lift strips.” The deep-vee which he evolved is a monohedron type - initially with no twist, and therefore with the total area of the planing bottom at a constant angle of attack (when then evolved into subtle changes (some twist) as the design optimized. It is truly amazing - and typical of Ray’s intuitive sense - that today, after so many attempts at a better deep-vee racing hull, and no doubt with various improvements, that Ray’s original 24-degree deadrise is still used. The essential design, in fact, has changed very little after decades of fine-tuning.