After Zero Off - Whats Next?

[ozski]

Does anyone have any thoughts on how speed control might advance and get better in the future? What are the negatives with the current tech that need to be sorted? Are we moving towards boat path control as well? I own and run a software company so I'm always thinking about how we can use mobile in this space and I have a few ideas of my own.

[auskier]

I believe an auto tracking system exists and several reputable people have tested it/skied it. I wouldn't doubt that a forum member or two has seen it. that will be next.

[Edbrazil]

Currently, speed control systems have too many settings to diddle with, and need too

much driver input. That could use a fix. This Winter, I was around when another

company was doing some semi-secret testing. We'll see what happens.

[LeonL]

Auto-tracking, boat path control, whatever you name it, that's when I stop tournament driving. Won't be any fun.

[Edbrazil]

@LeonL Back when speed control (PP) first was required, a couple of Sr. Drivers from

the Miami area quit at that time.

 

Still need to make the system with an underwater monorail. If they can build a snow

ski resort indoors in Dubai, they could do this. Or maybe Disney? Would be an

advance over cable skiing, as there would be no side-to-side movement.

 

Back-back when, late 1980's maybe, I did an article for WaterSki Magazine about

future towboats, and there was a nice concept drawing of such a system.

[oldjeep]

@Edbrazil‌

 

I wonder why nobody has actually implemented a system like that. Doesn't seem like there are any technical reasons that it could not be done.

 

[Than_Bogan]

@Edbrazil I 100% agree about too many parameters (the correct number of skier-tunable parameters is 0), but I'm not quite following about requiring driver input. The driver just sets the speed. Or are you talking about the need to steer?

 

The future, of course, is a fully autonomous exclusively-solar-powered ski boat. Doubt I'll live to see THAT, though.

[skihart]

@Horton had a comment or two in another thread that makes me think that he knows something we don't.

[MISkier]

Voice recognition to accept (and confirm) desired settings is probably next.

[The_MS]

One problem I see would be that it is a change in the feel of the slalom pull. It may never be accepted as feeling good as a boat out in front of you.

[MrJones]

Auto tracking (or whatever you want to call it) is coming.

[swc5150]

Personally, I'd hate to see an underwater rail system cannibalize boat sales, resulting in the elimination of some models. I don't know if that would actually happen, but it's nice to have some great direct drive options out there in the new boat market.

[ToddL]

Just keep in mind this... Whatever the next big tech thing is, it will flow downhill and price out some people from participating in our sport. Whatever is implemented at elite levels will flow down to Nationals and thus to regionals and thus to state championships and thus to local tournaments in prep for all of the above. So, if a monorail drive tow system is in our sport's competitive future, start saving your pennies because your site will have to buy and install one before you know it.

 

Hopefully, we won't throw out the boats too soon. Ideally, whatever tech is adopted hopefully is done so in a way that can be retrofitted on existing towboats. We have to keep the current fleet functional and valued. If we cut off all existing boats as no longer viable practice tools due to new tech that can't be retro-fitted, then we will have injured our sport. Sure, it will eventually recover from the injury, but there will be a period of healing. That's how I see the transition from Accuski/PP to ZO. I love the ZO pull, but our sport is still not fully healed from that transition.

[jerrym]

It would be helpful to have a display that indicates variance from the center line of the ideal boat path. This would be most helpful for the set up to the course. Many lakes require a turn before the course and both skier and driver would benefit from a better/earlier set up.

[ToddL]

@jerrym - Hmmm... GPS path tracking and logging. First for driver feedback on centerline. Then, maybe the ability to save an out-of-course path for a particular site to USB and upload/share it with other boats as a recommended set-down/turn path.

[jerrym]

@ToddL‌ - sharing the preferred path would be nice for tournaments. Good thought.

[thompjs]

You are talking about survey quality GPS to get location accuracy in inches -- $$$$

[RAWSki]

Centerline tracking or deviation certainly would be welcome, there is probably even technology out there in the from of automotive Lane Departure Warning systems that could be adapted.

Have to agree with ToddL, having to make the transition to ZO is tough physically and financially, so tough I haven't let go of my Accuski-ProTour or the spare parts and pieces I keep in the basement!

Call me nostalgic ...... and don't take away my Blackberry either! HA

[Horton]

@skihart‌ I know lots of things but not much about this. I do know that at least one other company has developed speed control. My understanding it that one of the problems is jump.

[MattP]

@Horton‌ Jump has been the driving factor for most speed controlled systems to be out dated, AcuSki ->PP->ZO

[Horton]

And that is good for the sport how?

[MattP]

@Horton‌ I never said it was good...

[Chef23]

I don't want another speed control. It is bad enough that I need to go ski tournaments behind speed control I can't put in my boat but I don't need another option I can't practice behind.

[Jody_Seal]

Here is our problem the way I see it. As per our rules each towboat company must provide an acceptable and approved speed control system. Where the problem exists now is that each manufacture control gains needs are different from manufacture to manufacture. Our current approved system ZO rely's on each manufacture to basically fend for their selves as far as how the gains are applied to each application. Nautiques have a number of engineers on staff and are entrenched in making sure the gains are correct for their boat as per the current governing rules. The rest of the world rely's on a couple of skiers and Mr. Will Bush (who with out him this system might not work well in other manufactures boats) and who ever may listen to them at ZO for application gains. Main reason why many skiers cant seem to adjust their settings from boat to boat of different manufacture.

 

Mr Brazil claims " speed control systems have too many settings to diddle with, and need too

much driver input. That could use a fix" This I disagree with. Many times since Zero Off has come into play under other then ordinary conditions many drivers wish they had the availability and adjust-ability for a few more revs, or the ability to slow down. Especially in jumping where their is sooooo many different approaches to the ramp by the skiers the system damn sure does not give all an equal pull for all. Where we went wrong in the past was we did not as an organization penalize officials and drivers that cheated or looked the other way when a driver was not driving as per rules and policy!

 

 

I look forward to something different as most all of us that have had to deal with ZO will agree that their customer service rating is well below ZERO !!!

 

Was at a tournament over the weekend where their was one boat pulling 35 skiers, what would have happened if the If both GPS pucks had failed? What? Stop the event? Tell everyone sorry drive back 7-8 hours home? and these pucks are failing at a far to high rate and lets not forget these guy's are asking $400 each for replacement that they paid a fraction for. Their is no fall back other then driving by hand with controls and instruments that were not designed to do so.

 

Like most all skiers I have adapted to the current approved system but would rather see something a whole lot simpler in design and application. At least with Perfect Pass it is biased on RPM and as long as the engine runs the system will control.

 

Ranting at Atlanta Hartsfield Airport!!

 

 

 

 

[MattP]

@rico‌ at an affordable price.

@Jody_Seal‌ very insightful. You could be ranting from WSA while skiing but no boat and not skiing going on in ATL any more.. Just a shuttle ride from the airport..

[Chef23]

@rico I already have $1400 into a stargazer system I don't want to put another 1K plus into another system.

[ozski]

Ok my ideas run along the lines that the new system will sync with your mobile device and share data, personal settings etc - imaging being able to totally customize your pull on your mobile device before you ski, something else to tinker with I know but pretty cool... I wonder if ZO is smart enough to report on things like the load on the rope and duration of that load, tie some of that data in with video and it becomes interesting. Push the whole lot into the cloud, any device, any boat, anywhere...

[Brady]

i would like to see a new system I could put on my wife that would make her oblivious to when I go and ski. I don't care how much it would cost, I would buy!

[Ilivetoski]

I think people are getting ahead of themselves here... The fact is, most skiers dont like paying for a $40,000-$60,000 boat. Not many people will say "i have no problem with dishing out that kinda money". Now, if we put in a auto drive system (no telling how much that would cost) it will drive up prices of boats like what other people have mentioned.

 

Here is the problem:

These companies need to stay in business. If these boats get to the $90,000-$100,000 mark, people will not buy them. Either the comapnies will go under or they will revert to something like ZO again. These comapnies know what people are willing to pay and what they are willing to take (equilibrium price) and they understand if they go above what people are willing to pay, demand will fall. The last thing these companies need is for less people to buy their boats.

 

My point- Not many people can afford a boat near the six figure mark. Many of those who can afford it will not be willing to pay it. Price increases in boats would be a HUGE mistake.

[Intheday]

1 inch accuracy is available in agricultural auto steer this relies on GPS plus ground station. Speed may be an issue in the correction but the ability is there. That said I want speed control that can be retro fitted to all boats carby and EFI that just works for the every day skier.

[ozski]

@Ilivetoski - You won't stop people building a better mouse trap, there will always be buyers who want the best of the best. Hull designs can probably only get to a certain point then the difference comes down the bolt on features and benefits. First to market with the latest and best will almost certainly win. And BTW look how off the charts stupidly excessive wake board boats are..

[Ilivetoski]

@ozski but its basic economics. When a company makes a product that is too expensive for people, what happens? They dont buy it. At the end of the day these boat manufactures are one thing- a company. There would most certainty be at least one manufacturer who offers a boat that drives like a boat does today. This would offer an option to people who still want to spend $50,000 on a boat. Also, wake board board boats are a completely different market and they can justify their cost with much larger engines (some have 2 engines), much larger boats, more accessories, and the fact that the demand is there and that these companies dont have to offer them at a lower price because they sell at the $100,000+ mark. If they did not sell, you would not see them for that much. Anything is worth what someone is willing to pay. Not a penny more.

[oldjeep]

@livetoski the 90-140k boats are already here and they are having no problem selling them. They are wake boats. Problem is that the pure ski boat market is tiny, not much incentive to compete with a better and cheaper mousetrap.

[Zman]

@Jody_Seal, others - how much of a problem have the ZO pucks really been? I am about to move from PP to ZO. What do I have to look forward to there?

[Ilivetoski]

@oldjeep better and cheaper mousetrap? If its better it wont be priced cheaper. If you have something like a Nautique 200 (say you can buy it from the dealer for $65,000) or you can have this auto driving boat for $100,000. Save the $35k to pay a driver! Offer me $35k to drive I will meet you to ski at 3am in the dark.

[oldjeep]

If there is any real competition then better/ innovation doesn't wind up costing more. But with a market of hundreds there is no incentive to innovate and compete there is no money in it.

[Ilivetoski]

So why come out with new boats like the Txi, 200, Carbon Pro, Prostar?

[oldjeep]

Because people buy them and the companies profit. But what would the up side to someone starting a competitor to zo to sell a hundred units a year?

[BraceMaker]

My thoughts.

 

What's next.

 

Web connectivity - user profiles.

Skiers can have their settings preloaded into a database, this would allow users to have profiles and preferences saved for the different boats/props/engines, the boat would use its own configuration profile to check for the skiers preferences, and the boat driver would not need to enter the data. It could also be set to have memo's or other preferences (like perhaps a profile for how you like getting pulled out of the water, or how it ramps up into the course)

Boat could also use this to upload engine hours/check engine/faults/fuel/oil change warnings etc. At tournaments the shore crew could upload who was up next and the driver wouldn't need to do any settings.

 

For path control - instead of GPS I think the best would be a shore mounted laser and a receiver array on the boat OR a heavier cable mainline with a pulse and receiver in the hull - work with portable course manufacturers and the second idea could perhaps implement it in an easily portable means, otherwise the laser idea would include a viewer on both with references that would let you line it up with the course.

 

Short of a rail or eliminating the boat I think driver input will always be required, but the concept that the boat would "fine tune" the overall path would be a nice way to UP the overall quality of pulls across the board.

[MattP]

@oldjeep‌ I would think closer to 400. @ShaneH‌ would know how any new ZO equipped 3-Event boats hit the water each year. Also ZO is also comes on wake boats.

[oldjeep]

Zo is available on some wake/crossover boats

Have yet to see one that was actually ordered with that option. Malibu has their own system that controls not only the speed but the ballast and wedge per profile, which makes more sense for that sort of boat.

[GregHind]

G23 I drove had zero off

[gator1]

LIke @BraceMaker‌ says path control via laser is next. The technology is there today. It will take some tech guy getting frustrated enough to build one just to prove he can, the economics will never work out.

 

In '84 I built a pre-satelite ZO. @Jody_Seal‌ may remember testing it will Bill Snook at CC. Used a patented no lag solid state pickup to report instantaneous speed for closed loop feedback, regardless of skier weight, headwind and all that bs. Airguide bought the patent from me on the speedo portion.

 

Satellites have lag time. That's why jumping is so hard for anything using GPS. And that's why path control will be via a $30 laser, not a $300,000,000 satellite.

 

I was also a jumper, and I fricking LOVED my system for jump. Turn the gain up, overclock the processor and MAMMA! Had to put a vacuum accumulator and oversized plumbing in the actuatator system so we could go WOT in under a tenth.

 

slalom Skiers hated it. It ran 36 mph, none of this +/- 1.5 mph bullshit the hand drivers were using to get a good time. Imagine ZO set to Xinfinity. 36mph or as close as HP of the boat could hold.

 

Since everybody hated it, and the market was SO SMALL I quit, but the patent application for cruise control was on record.

 

Fast forward to '94. Snook calls me and says PP is trying to blackmail him since Olympic committee says we can be in Olympics if we take driver out of equation. Says if I can find documentation of my prior art he can shut PP down. I say cool, what's in it for me. Snook says new boat if I can find my documentation.

 

I left work early that day.

 

Found the pictures and documentation four layers down in the workbench file pile. Faxed it to Bill, and three weeks later Pacific Nautiques shows up in my driveway with a Nautique. NO f--cking lawyers, no contract. Just me and Bill on the phone. Since then, I run Nautiques, and you should too.

 

But, I digress.

 

It'll be the same deal on path control. Quixotic mission by some arrogant/frustrated tech head. But when we get it, practice PBs will count.

 

 

[skibug]

Practice PB's will count? I am in!!

[ForrestGump]

Well, a version of ZO is in all Nautique Team boats, whether they're wakeboard or 3 event. You're looking at a total of 2500+ units(whether the gauge style or the control box kind(such as in the Nautique Team or MC Pro Star) a year that ZO sells in the Watersports and 3 event markets.

[gator1]

@ShaneH‌ Ya, but how many need/want path control? Do you know the CC200 sales numbers? Wakeboard, trickers don't care about path. I don't, but I'd guess under a 100 a year????? I'd make one for 2500 units a year.

[BraceMaker]

What I wonder most about speed control and guidance is where you can claim "good enough"

 

@gator1 - as you mention you had nearly constant speed. If you are attempting to create perfection you'd essentially need to have a roller coaster company set track end to end down the lake ~10 feet up. This would have a cart with an arm that went down to true pylon height and would be hauled back and forth by a high tension cable system. Of course to drive it back and forth at fixed speed you'd either need a system WAY high on torque - or perhaps using a harmonic drive such that the pull wouldn't stall the motor.

[scotty_alz]

the monorail or foil under the water sounds like your on to something that would work great for the cable park. but if that was to happen how would you take a boat judge your family friends coach or take your boat to the public lake to hang out for the day. that doesnt sound like a way to sell boats. if you could add auto tracking from when the boat comes around the island and lines up with a sensor much like zo taking over the speed. you would take away drivers that are not totally focused on driving, driving people that load the rope more or just enjoy steering for the ski partners or who they want to ski good and not want to. this was the reason for speed control to begin with. i also think it would be cheaper to have a gps transmit to a computer program showing deviations in boat path than buying cameras that can zoom and focus enough to see 2000 feet down the lake

[6balls]

Don't like any of it and consider most of it unnecessary. Gotta wonder what portion of this stuff makes our life better rather than just more expensive in order to have something new. More barriers to entry and more barriers to ongoing participation in our sport for little if any performance gain for the vast majority.

 

 

[BraceMaker]

Why slalom needs a rail.

 

@20 seconds of actual skiing gate to gate/pass, the majority of 30 minutes pulling a skier is the skier sitting their butt in the water at the end of the course. Swapping skiers takes time while they gear up, on many lakes the boat has to idle back to docks to pick up different skiers, and a good portion of your skier effort is riding around islands front and back.

 

Eliminate the boat and have a track and you could have skiers at both end relaxing on the dock or floating in the water, you could cycle 10 skiers 8 passes each in the same time if you had a system where multiple guys would be staged up and instead of waiting with an idling boat.

 

Lake design could shorten making it more attractive to spectate.

 

 

The reality of slalom skiing with a course is that since many states (Michigan for instance) require DNR permits which are essentially impossible to get on public water to launch a course - access has already killed course skiing.