Ron came to Vancouver for a couple of days and I got to try out the DOL-fin Orca extensively in the pool and ocean. I will be writing a full review for deeperblue. The short story is that I was blown away! The product is unbelievable. The monofin (at least for freediving) may soon be obsolete.
-
Welcome to the DeeperBlue.com Forums, the largest online community dedicated to Freediving, Scuba Diving and Spearfishing. To gain full access to the DeeperBlue.com Forums you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
- Join over 44,280+ fellow diving enthusiasts from around the world on this forum
- Participate in and browse from over 516,210+ posts.
- Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
- Post your own photos or view from 7,441+ user submitted images.
- All this and much more...
You can gain access to all this absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
Extreme Dolfinism
- Thread starterREVAN
- Start date
Thread Status: Hello
, There was no answer in this thread for more than 60 days.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
It can take a long time to get an up-to-date response or contact with relevant users.
No one can really plan a record attempt with a DOL-Fin Orca until the fin is delivered and available for training.
The plan is to do a design for manufacture phase to see if I can streamline the production process. I was originally thinking that I would be introducing direct sales in November. I’m now recognizing that is ambitious given my new (unexpected) schedule for the June-July timeframe. In the event the redesign gets delayed past November, or if November just is not soon enough for someone’s competition schedule, an option would be to build more duplicates of the proof-of-principle prototypes and introduce that as a first generation product. It may not look as refined, but it will certainly get the job done.
If you are interested in acquiring a DOL-Fin for use in a competition and planning record attempts in CWT or DYN, please feel free to e-mail me directly to let me know your needs. I will do my best to accommodate.
Ron
Raw video from 2010 FWC Okinawa:
Dynamic performance by Natalia Molchanova using the DOL-Fin Orca proof-of-principal hydrofoil monofin prototype: Just shy or her 225 meter world record, she swam about 220 meters on a single breath with this experimental monofin after only a few hours practice with it.
Dynamic performance by Natalia Molchanova using the DOL-Fin Orca proof-of-principal hydrofoil monofin prototype: Just shy or her 225 meter world record, she swam about 220 meters on a single breath with this experimental monofin after only a few hours practice with it.
Last edited by a moderator:
The production design development efforts for the DOL-Fin Orca are progressing nicely. The fin is getting more durable, better looking and the performance is going up (again). It is even more streamline than were the proof-of-principle prototypes I took to Worlds, and I've got better tuning of the fin's suspension and control system to provide more effective thrust from the return kick. I think the new model has a more balanced feel to the fin stroke which helps to promote good body form and technique. Preliminary results indicate I've picked up another 10% distance per stroke over the original Orca prototypes when doing continuous kicking.
Also, I updated the Smith Aerospace website today. A few nice pictures from the World Championships have been added to the Gallery and there's also some new content in the News section. For convenience, quick links are included below:
DOL-Fin Gallery - Smith Aerospace
Smith Aerospace - News
Also, I updated the Smith Aerospace website today. A few nice pictures from the World Championships have been added to the Gallery and there's also some new content in the News section. For convenience, quick links are included below:
DOL-Fin Gallery - Smith Aerospace
Smith Aerospace - News
This is a production prototype of the DOL-Fin Orca. The standard colors will be two-tone black and white modeled after the colors of Orca marine mammals, but this example provides an indication of what can be done with optional custom color schemes and some iridescent paint. The main new feature of this fin is a seamless one piece composite fairing that is stronger, better looking and more streamlined than what was on the P.O.P. models. The fin suspension system has also been reworked giving it a more balanced feel over the stroke cycle while providing more distance per stroke and better high-speed performance than before.
As always, I'm interested in hearing feedback and suggestions.
Ron
As always, I'm interested in hearing feedback and suggestions.
Ron
Last edited by a moderator:
nice! are you still shooting for a nov. release. What is the performance difference between the orca and the dol-fin hp(being its half the price) though the orca looks sooo slick I might have to save-up, some serious progress since your first post--- there is a pool comp in Los Angeles next month you should try and take it
Well, I also wonder....if price was an indication, then one would assume a 50% performance increase over the classics or even the HPs.
However, WHAT IS performance? Is it TIME or EFFICIENCY? Or is it Both, and if both how do we put them together?
per the graphs on the website:
Classics reach end pool in 15.7 sec in 11 strokes
HPs reach end pool in 15.3 sec in 10 strokes
Ocras reach end pool in 14.3 sec in 7 strokes
Lets do some Math!
As for the Time:
The Ocras Reached in 14.3 secs-(an even one second advantage) the Ocra comes out to about 6.5% better than the HPs, meaning they would would need 7% more time to be as slow as the HPs(14.3 +7% = 15.3)
-and over the classics about 9% better time, meaning if they would need 9.8% more time to be as slow as the classics. (14.3 +9.8% = 15.7)
As for the finstrokes:
The Ocra reached end of pool in in 7 strokes.
-that is 30% more efficient over the HPs 10 strokes--meaning that the Ocras would require 43% more strokes to match the HPs. (7+43% = 10)
-that is are 36% more efficient than the Classics-- meaning that the Ocras would require 57% more strokes to match the the Classics. (7+57% = 11)
Does everyone follow me here?
So the only puzzling thing to me is when comparing the classics to the ocra, the ocra only did a 9% better time but was able to do 36% less strokes than the classics...i don't see how that much more 'efficiency' accounts for so little 'time' in relation.
As I see it, if you are in some money-making competitions then the extra edge could be worthwhile.
As for me, I think I'll be happy with the Classics, which I have just ordered! I will be using them starting in October and will post my reviews, videos and feedback on them. But sure, I'd take the Ocras if i was a rich son-of-a-bitch or if Ron would hand em over to me! haha... Classics should be fine for my humble character.
However, WHAT IS performance? Is it TIME or EFFICIENCY? Or is it Both, and if both how do we put them together?
per the graphs on the website:
Classics reach end pool in 15.7 sec in 11 strokes
HPs reach end pool in 15.3 sec in 10 strokes
Ocras reach end pool in 14.3 sec in 7 strokes
Lets do some Math!
As for the Time:
The Ocras Reached in 14.3 secs-(an even one second advantage) the Ocra comes out to about 6.5% better than the HPs, meaning they would would need 7% more time to be as slow as the HPs(14.3 +7% = 15.3)
-and over the classics about 9% better time, meaning if they would need 9.8% more time to be as slow as the classics. (14.3 +9.8% = 15.7)
As for the finstrokes:
The Ocra reached end of pool in in 7 strokes.
-that is 30% more efficient over the HPs 10 strokes--meaning that the Ocras would require 43% more strokes to match the HPs. (7+43% = 10)
-that is are 36% more efficient than the Classics-- meaning that the Ocras would require 57% more strokes to match the the Classics. (7+57% = 11)
Does everyone follow me here?
So the only puzzling thing to me is when comparing the classics to the ocra, the ocra only did a 9% better time but was able to do 36% less strokes than the classics...i don't see how that much more 'efficiency' accounts for so little 'time' in relation.
As I see it, if you are in some money-making competitions then the extra edge could be worthwhile.
As for me, I think I'll be happy with the Classics, which I have just ordered! I will be using them starting in October and will post my reviews, videos and feedback on them. But sure, I'd take the Ocras if i was a rich son-of-a-bitch or if Ron would hand em over to me! haha... Classics should be fine for my humble character.
Maybe you could use a bit more moderated tone, Hero - not sure why you feel you need to rant on the Orca. Setting price at a product it the choice of the manufacturer: he has the full right to sell it for whatever he decides, and what is profitable for him. And it is your choice to take it or not for that price. No need to get angry about it.
However, besides the surprising performance, the main advantage of Orca is its expected durability due to the design, and the possibility to easily exchange spare parts if needed - neither of it is the case at any classical monofins, where after some 3 seasons you usually have to buy a new one. At Orca, I see no reason why you could not keep it for at least a decade, perhaps even several of them - but we need to wait couple of years, of course, to see it in the real life.
Another advantage is that you can travel with the fin much easier than with a monofin.
And as for the performance - at freediving it is usually not the time, but the distance that counts. The fact that 20+times WR holder Natalia Molchanova decided to do her dynamic swim on the last World Championship just after having the fin on the feet for the first time several days ago, and being able to almost equalize her previous WR, speaks enough about the performance of the fin. You can't have a better proof of the quality, especially because at team championship freedivers rarely push to the absolute limits, because they do not risk only their own position, but the one of their teammates too.
However, besides the surprising performance, the main advantage of Orca is its expected durability due to the design, and the possibility to easily exchange spare parts if needed - neither of it is the case at any classical monofins, where after some 3 seasons you usually have to buy a new one. At Orca, I see no reason why you could not keep it for at least a decade, perhaps even several of them - but we need to wait couple of years, of course, to see it in the real life.
Another advantage is that you can travel with the fin much easier than with a monofin.
And as for the performance - at freediving it is usually not the time, but the distance that counts. The fact that 20+times WR holder Natalia Molchanova decided to do her dynamic swim on the last World Championship just after having the fin on the feet for the first time several days ago, and being able to almost equalize her previous WR, speaks enough about the performance of the fin. You can't have a better proof of the quality, especially because at team championship freedivers rarely push to the absolute limits, because they do not risk only their own position, but the one of their teammates too.
Last edited:
trux I think when he says classic hes not talking about classic monofin, but is saying he ordered the cheaper older version of the orca. If Natalia or others start doing records with this fin I dont think the higher price will be an issue people will basically have to buy them to keep up. The stoke count and speed per length dont tell much I can match that with a hyper, its the energy expendeture and streamlining that will count and looking at natalia's video it looks promissing
@ TRUX....was I "ranting on the Orca"?
Come on dude, WTF?
I'm taking only the information found here: Smith Aerospace - Products and Comparing the 3 DOL-fins (Classic, HP and Ocras)
I don't know what your are talking about nor why you feel I am angry about anything. Like I said I have ORDERED and PURCHASED the Classic DOL-Fins and will provide insights as to their performance after October and look forward to all DOL-fin future products. Just that the Ocra's I feel are more for competition at a professional level, which should provide the edge that I mentioned in my previous post. Therefore the DOL-fin Classics will be suitable for me.
Come on dude, WTF?
I'm taking only the information found here: Smith Aerospace - Products and Comparing the 3 DOL-fins (Classic, HP and Ocras)
I don't know what your are talking about nor why you feel I am angry about anything. Like I said I have ORDERED and PURCHASED the Classic DOL-Fins and will provide insights as to their performance after October and look forward to all DOL-fin future products. Just that the Ocra's I feel are more for competition at a professional level, which should provide the edge that I mentioned in my previous post. Therefore the DOL-fin Classics will be suitable for me.
Hero is right to question “WHAT IS performance? Is it TIME or EFFICIENCY? Or is it Both, and if both how do we put them together?”. ‘Performance’ can mean different things to different people. It all depends on what you are trying to do. I’m sure there are some people who would add cost to the performance equation as well.
I am introducing three products that use the DOL-Fin technology and they each have different qualities. For freediving applications, there is little doubt that the Orca fin has the best overall efficiency, but the design had to get more complicated to get that performance advantage. However, even without considering cost, if I was going to strap on a scuba tank, the Orca is the last fin I would grab of the three. Between the Classic and the HP, though close in performance numbers, there are still reasons to choose one over the other. From a hydrodynamic perspective, the HP has a more efficient fin blade, but the Classic can produce more thrust. Therefore, the hydrodynamic advantage the HP has over the Classic will not be felt as an advantage unless the diver has a really clean diving rig, or is using the fin for freediving.
Hero is getting the DOL-Fin Classic because that is what I have available to sell. My understanding is that he is intending to modify that fin to be a DOL-Fin HP when I have the parts available (easy upgrades to make). The HP has the same basic hydrofoil as the Orca. Therefore, its hydrodynamic efficiency for the production of thrust will be about the same as the Orca’s. However, the fin is not used the same on the HP and it also lacks the streamlining advantages of the Orca. The Orca’s fin is on a longer extension. Making a comparison to a bicycle, the longer extension is like being in a higher gear. A 3 speed bicycle is not mechanically more efficient in gear 3 than it is in gear 1, but the gearing may affect the efficiency with which your body can power it depending on the conditions under which it is being used. The same is true with the fins. Under conditions of low drag (which will promote higher swimming speeds) the Orca will have a better match to human biology. At lower speeds and/or under conditions of higher drag, the HP will be the better fit.
Competitive freedivers expend great efforts to attain the lowest drag possible. This includes the classic form with head tucked down low between extended arms. Though low in drag, this body form prevents the diver from seeing forward and where they are going. Recreational divers often swim with their head tilted back so that they can see in front of them and often carry cameras or other drag producing equipment. The recreational freediver can experience as much as 20% drag increase just for the benefit of seeing forward. The higher drag will tend to eat up the Orca's advantage over the HP. So it all depends on how you are going to use it.
I am introducing three products that use the DOL-Fin technology and they each have different qualities. For freediving applications, there is little doubt that the Orca fin has the best overall efficiency, but the design had to get more complicated to get that performance advantage. However, even without considering cost, if I was going to strap on a scuba tank, the Orca is the last fin I would grab of the three. Between the Classic and the HP, though close in performance numbers, there are still reasons to choose one over the other. From a hydrodynamic perspective, the HP has a more efficient fin blade, but the Classic can produce more thrust. Therefore, the hydrodynamic advantage the HP has over the Classic will not be felt as an advantage unless the diver has a really clean diving rig, or is using the fin for freediving.
Hero is getting the DOL-Fin Classic because that is what I have available to sell. My understanding is that he is intending to modify that fin to be a DOL-Fin HP when I have the parts available (easy upgrades to make). The HP has the same basic hydrofoil as the Orca. Therefore, its hydrodynamic efficiency for the production of thrust will be about the same as the Orca’s. However, the fin is not used the same on the HP and it also lacks the streamlining advantages of the Orca. The Orca’s fin is on a longer extension. Making a comparison to a bicycle, the longer extension is like being in a higher gear. A 3 speed bicycle is not mechanically more efficient in gear 3 than it is in gear 1, but the gearing may affect the efficiency with which your body can power it depending on the conditions under which it is being used. The same is true with the fins. Under conditions of low drag (which will promote higher swimming speeds) the Orca will have a better match to human biology. At lower speeds and/or under conditions of higher drag, the HP will be the better fit.
Competitive freedivers expend great efforts to attain the lowest drag possible. This includes the classic form with head tucked down low between extended arms. Though low in drag, this body form prevents the diver from seeing forward and where they are going. Recreational divers often swim with their head tilted back so that they can see in front of them and often carry cameras or other drag producing equipment. The recreational freediver can experience as much as 20% drag increase just for the benefit of seeing forward. The higher drag will tend to eat up the Orca's advantage over the HP. So it all depends on how you are going to use it.
As the DOL-Fin Classic Beta-Test Program entrance window is closing, I’ve experienced a surge in orders that have been keeping me busy and taking time away from Orca development. November is looking ambitious for the Orca’s release date, but may still be possible to meet. However, I expect that I’ll be lacking details like a completed owner’s manual. As such I may be requiring liability waivers to supplement for the usual C.Y.A. maintenance and safety warnings that are typically covered there.
Last edited:
Very rarely in any industry to you pay double for Double the performance.
it takes larger jumps in technology and materials to improve performance slighlty.
look at motorcycles, cars anything for that matter. and you wont get double the acceleration for double the money. its the overall total improvement and the pinnacle of engineering at the time of production that cost the money.
so trying to ask why the Orca costs double the classic or HP and not understnading why it doesnt have double the performance.... your either having a dig or have some very unrealistic expectations of life....
it takes larger jumps in technology and materials to improve performance slighlty.
look at motorcycles, cars anything for that matter. and you wont get double the acceleration for double the money. its the overall total improvement and the pinnacle of engineering at the time of production that cost the money.
so trying to ask why the Orca costs double the classic or HP and not understnading why it doesnt have double the performance.... your either having a dig or have some very unrealistic expectations of life....
Exactly.
Look at the Bugatti Veyron.
Original model generated 1001 bhp (746 kW; 1015 PS[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_horsepower"][/ame]) and had a top speed of 408.47 km/h (253.81 mph)
The Super Sport generated 1,184 bhp (883 kW; 1200 PS) and had a top speed of 431.072 km/h (267.856 mph)
So for an 18.2% increase in power, they gained a 5.5% increase in top speed. Why? Because at those speeds, air is thick, and drag is a huge factor - in order to double the speed the force must be quadrupled (without accounting for heatloss and so forth).
In water, drag is significantly greater than in air, so it requires significant increases in power and drag coefficient to make a tiny increase in speed.
The cost however, is €1 301 980 for the base model and €1 912 500 for the Super Sport. Which is a 46.9% increase in cost! All for 5.5% more speed
Regards,
WMM
Look at the Bugatti Veyron.
Original model generated 1001 bhp (746 kW; 1015 PS[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_horsepower"][/ame]) and had a top speed of 408.47 km/h (253.81 mph)
The Super Sport generated 1,184 bhp (883 kW; 1200 PS) and had a top speed of 431.072 km/h (267.856 mph)
So for an 18.2% increase in power, they gained a 5.5% increase in top speed. Why? Because at those speeds, air is thick, and drag is a huge factor - in order to double the speed the force must be quadrupled (without accounting for heatloss and so forth).
In water, drag is significantly greater than in air, so it requires significant increases in power and drag coefficient to make a tiny increase in speed.
The cost however, is €1 301 980 for the base model and €1 912 500 for the Super Sport. Which is a 46.9% increase in cost! All for 5.5% more speed
Regards,
WMM