AUTOPILOT = PERFECT BOAT PATH???

[MuskokaKy]

Hey Ballers,

 

As many of you may recall Nautique made an all electric boat some years back now. Last, year i had made a reference to that boat stating " wouldn't it be cool is they just went full out Tesla; and had auto pilot??"

 

With the recent and forever on going talks about boat path and such, i wonder if a company out there is testing this somewhere??? I mean if i can go from Toronto to Naples without having to touch the wheel; surely someone can make a boat go straight for 850 feet...

 

In theory driver is now throttle man / emergency back up when skier falls.

 

I figure with all the gear heads and engineers on here, i can't be the only one to have thought about it.

 

**To to take one point further. I'd be willing to pay somewhere around $10k for that option. ( maybe that's too cheap i don't know; but that's what it is "worth" to me; a half-ass skier). It would probably be worth more to the ski schools / boats that are used in tourny's.

 

Thanks,

 

Ky

 

 

[aupatking]

A little talk about that here. Right now just have very accurate path review. https://www.ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/comment/354060

https://www.ballofspray.com/forum#/discussion/22719/gps-driver-tracker-boat-path-demos

Link to sure path http://sure-path.com/

[Kelvin]

Systems are being tested now.

[BraceMaker]

I think there are two things here.

 

A: I don't think a computerized/gps based auto pilot can achieve what we currently expect for boat path.

 

B: I do think a "learning" autopilot system could generate better paths for a skier over time and I think we could change our understanding of what a boat path was supposed to be around an auto-steer type system.

 

For the first point you're skiing a tailwind and take a gentle early pull out, autosteer needs not to overcorrect. Another guy skiing head wind and is a big strong heavy skier on a slightly undersized ski and takes a really aggressive pull out. A driver can both read the situation, maybe remembers your set in the first round or has driven you before. Maybe on your pull out he anticipates you a bit better on 1 ball. The driver has the advantage of foresite and proactive steps to getting you through the course. An Autopilot is going to have a really tough time and will be correcting constantly after the deviation occurs.

 

How to fix that - first and foremost you have a web connected boat that has skier profiles for ZO/Steering. You give it your ID number (or it picks up that nifty chip in your Radar NFC equipped pro build??) and it says skier X has skied 400 passes behind autosteer - computed cumulative correction factor at gate, 1,2,3,4,5,6 each with a position referenced to the GPS position in the mapped course and feedback from ZO/deviations that previously occurred on system. Maybe the system can pull information from local weather for wind direction and speed based on the gps location and direction of the pull and also have headwind/tailwind predictive power or over the course of a day have an onsite/boat specific calibration to improve the pull.

 

Since your skier now has a profile he can log onto a portal and see passes and maybe delete passes where they knew they were out of position/form.

[MuskokaKy]

@BraceMaker i totally hear you and i love some of the ideas above.; I guess I am more saying how do we eliminate human error altogether ( is it possible, from a driving perspective)....eliminate the human. I do like where your thoughts are going though; right track forsure.

 

Let be jump off the deep end at risk of a panda.

 

With cable being a big game changer in the world of wake; i had thought about a fixed, submersible track that has an approx.10 ft ski pylon connected to the track( shaped like and eyeball ) that runs zero off and takes you down. Eliminates driver error and wake. could make for some interesting scores... Obviously this would be for a ski school / competition site....

 

This reduces wake and boat path deviation. two issues in the industry

 

I know some won't like this; but we all know this is NOT the dumbest thing that has been posted here LOL

[Horton]

@MuskokaKy Cable is not the future. It's too expensive per lake for competitive training. It might be fantastic for the masses who only want to ski a little bit but I don't just do not see how it works for competitive skiers.

 

Auto drive systems are currently being developed. Even in the darkest corners of the rumor mill there are not very many details but the technology is being worked on.

[BrennanKMN]

With a properly designed system any outside force wouldn't matter. Skier weight, wind, ski, rollers, ect.

 

With an accurate enough GPS, fast enough steering and a tightly tuned PID loop you'd never see the boat deviate more than a predetermined amount. This is exactly how ZO works. It sees a speed deviation from the baseline speed and it reacts. How fast it reacts and how hard it reacts (the PID loop) is controlled by the ABC123 settings. ZO could have been programmed to use 100% throttle to get back to baseline ASAP, but skiers likely would have found that harsh and undesirable. I have a feeling that 'perfect' steering and 'perfect' speed are more of an ideal on paper, not in the real world.

 

I for one like driving the boat, it's all part of the skiing experience to me.

[BraceMaker]

@MuskokaKy - 100% agree a cable ski course that actually had a pylon that ran straight down the lake would be a game changer. More so in "skier density" than anything else - consider how many skiers can cycle through a ski lake an hour and for that pleasure you have 2-3 boat crew just sitting there going back and forth with a 100K boat that gets replaced yearly.

 

I've sort of eliminated the idea of an underwater track, the water resistance of any sort of cart being lowed through - let alone a cart capable of having a 10' pole sticking out of the water with someone pulling hundreds of pounds of load at different angles.

 

Luckily another industry has what you need already - roller coasters + high speed chair lifts. Modular track section overhead, maybe 10' off the water with a pylon hanging down - this removes the resistance of the carrier through water as well as water disturbance, increases the serviceability and in cold climates keeps stuff out from under the ice, heck maybe you could pull snow skiers down an iced over lake for winter $$ Have two carriers which goes back and forth and a start dock at both end. Provision to drop your mainline like is at a cable park so that 2-4 skiers at a time could be situated ski on at each end. Properly done you come down the lake and drop for your rest break. Fall and your rope ends up back at the start dock.

 

Rope path would be dead nuts on - boat speed accommodated by a high tension carrier cable with a big flywheel with sufficient inertia (adjustable fly weights based on skier weight?) that the carrier wouldn't pogo in speed. Could even be run indoors or "semi" indoors where maybe both start docks are in heated rooms or just heat the water immediately around where you start/finish so that you could run in cooler weather comfortably (anyone can ski in 40 degree water for 30 seconds if they drop in a bath at both ends. You could even have a low speed tow rope running around the perimeter 15' out from the turn balls to drag you back to the start dock if you fell.

 

Obviously not feasible with the $ and demographics of waterskiing.

 

 

[swc5150]

It'll become mandated for tournaments and only available in the newest boats, with no retrofit depending on model year...joking (kind of). ;)

[aupatking]

Winter topics :'(

[MuskokaKy]

@aupatking you not wrong at all. I thought the same thing with the BOS HOF thread lol

 

Our winters are long and cold north of the boarder ( and my seasons ended July 7 on 2 ball breaking my tib and fib ( ankle). So i have a excuse; kind of ;)

 

@Horton don't disagree with your thoughts except price. I cant speak on either side but with boast @ $100k and most guys use them for only one or two years ( at high volume sites) it doesn't seem absurd from a cost perspective to go to a submersible track ( taking into account the million unknowns in play). Obv I don't have much of anything to compare to

 

Tell me a guy or girl here that wouldn't take a set behind a submersible???

 

@eleeski - no comment; trickers would be furious! LOL

 

 

[The_MS]

If @Zerooff is involved, we are screwed.

[ski6jones]

I imagine there's lots of give to the pull by virtue of the boat moving through a fluid even if the driver manages to pull a very straight path. Skiing from some mechanical simulation of a boat would feel VERY harsh by comparison, especially something on a track down the middle of the lake.

[aupatking]

I think @BraceMaker is right about the overhead vs submersible. The force required to move something substantial enough to resist a skiers pull, let alone the drag from the “device” itself, would be enormous. Then you get into underwater hardware. Just the silting itself would be a pain to deal with. You’d need to have integrated jets to blow the tracks clear. Such a device would still make a wake, but most of it would be underwater and would very likely erode the track supports. Since the pylon height is a standardized height, your whole lake would have to be perfectly level.......

Overhead it is. Anybody got any good Mega Millions numbers? I’ll build it if I win. and surely lose it all on this project. Still a fun thought

 

[RazorRoss3]

@The_MS, I'm going to get ZO to add DEF, 456, -, ++, and -- for a total of 180 unique ZO settings one of these days just to piss you off ;)

[BraceMaker]

@ski6jones exactly. Almost all of the "work" a driver does is before the skier pulls the boat off track. If you start looking at the problem like a feed back loop then the programming becomes very simple but the pull becomes almost 180 degrees out of sync of what is necessary for a good path.

 

Your only solution is either to monitor vector and load at the pylon for which I think I've posted before about a theoretical pylon based hydraulic system in which the force and vector of the force against the pylon would directly influence tracking of the boat. This is the idea that because the boat is experiencing a force inline with the rope you could use both the direction and force to control a mechanical solution for tracking.

 

The reality is that such a mechanical solution is like having a limited slip differential, sure you can do it but why not just program the ABS/Traction control to brake the other tire?

 

For boat path you essentially just need to define where/when/how hard/ how long a skier is pulling. You can do that based on a bit of historical data for the skier, GPS position in reference to the buoys, and some skier feed back. IE. does the skier prefer if the boat counters soft or firm, early or late, for a distance or quickly. And then you have to add in one last parameter which is are you in tolerance at 1,2,3,4 etc.

 

The historical data could give you some insight for instance does a skier tend to get later and more forceful down course, if a skier has a bad 1 do they tend to have a really hard 2? Just the things good drivers sort of already know about you but learned by a computer.

 

[UWSkier]

changing rope length on an overhead track system would be funky. You'd also have to design a bit of lateral give into the system. Even the BoS cult leader SN 200 has a bit of rocking motion when the skier hooks up out wide. An immovable object would be brutally harsh on the skier's muscles and tendons.

[liquid d]

Boats slide, and good drivers anticipate the pull. It's not on a track. We'll never have a system that would know the skiers running late and about to hammer you as a driver knows. The more you ski behind a particular driver, the better it gets.

Long live all our great drivers!

[JAS]

Sure Path sure seems interesting solution. Drivers will need to be capable driving to tolerance or there will be lots of re-rides and unhappy skiers. I have feeling that drivers would be weeded out, leaving an elite group for the significant tournaments.

[teammalibu]

The day they take the boat and driver out of the equation I quit!

[MuskokaKy]

@aupatking agree over head would probably be easy. for underground system the idea was have it set on piles to take care of leveling.

 

@liquid d i hear you. and its not to insult drivers, but its impossible for them to pull and driver the exact same for all skiers. So it creates a certain unfairness the industry has just accepted.

We don't use J -Crafts with out boards anymore; we have custom super protected man made lakes. we have some great tech upgrades like zero off...its evolution...I'm not saying take away the boat; I'm just saying lets get the drivers hands off the wheel ( if possible). The track was one idea.

 

 

[Zman]

@teammalibu. By then, you and I may be ready for shuffleboard. :smile:

[Stevie Boy]

@Bracemaker, just wondering how you would support a track the length required, without having pylons in the water ?

[BraceMaker]

Clearly it would have pylons.

Picture inverted roller coaster an arm going up and out track hanging below.

Could also have suspension cables from a few separate towers.

 

This would only be the sort of thing that could exist at a few select places just like cable parks are now - near large population centers as destinations where you would go. Imagine having one of these near downtown Chicago, knowing that if you were in town you could go get as much skiing as you wanted

[MuskokaKy]

@JAS Sure Path seems really interesting and something that could be implemented asap. Maybe already is with some guys. Without knowing much about it; price seems reasonable for what you are getting.

 

But it's kind of like going from PP to Zero Off ( not meant to offend). its great, but not next next level. Its an upgrade; like a 2.0 so to speak ( in my opinion)

 

Tesla's are really popular in the Toronto area ( we have / had amazing rebates on them here); so that where the Auto-Pilot interest is coming from. Thought there could / would be a conversion type in the works/ near future.

 

P.S. for all the baby boomers this rubbed the wrong way; my 61 Y.O father smacked me for all of you!

 

Merry Christmas Ballers!

[swc5150]

Lol the “boomer” card has been pulled. I just recently found out this is the new insult to anyone over 40 (not that you’re trying to insult us here) and just find it comical. :D

[thager]

Ha! Boomer here. Actually surprised you yun-ungs could get your nosies out of da fone

long enough to insult anyone. Also surprised day knows what insult be. Spoiler- gonna take way more dan dat to insult a boomer!!!

[dbutcher]

What is one older than a boomer called? This thread gives me a headache.

[Horton]

@swc5150

 

boomers were born between 1944 and 1964. They're current between 55-75 years old (76 million in U.S.) Gen X: Gen X was born between 1965 - 1979 and are currently between 40-54 years old (82 million people in U.S.)

[The_MS]

I hope they make us a protected class. It’s my only chance of ever having that distinction

[swc5150]

@Horton Oh I know, but someone needs to inform the millennials. Anyone older than them is a boomer:)

[Horton]

@BraceMaker have you ever heard of cable skiing?

[thager]

@The_MS All you have to do is leave and break back in illegally!

[BraceMaker]

@Horton yes. Have even tried it.

 

Not similar at all to slalom and not enjoyable (to me). It's more a game of loading up the cable than it is carving back and forth. Even to the point where often the gates and balls arent straight with one another

 

Needs a fixed pull point in order to be slalom.

[eleeski]

Cable skiing is the future. But I'm a boat loving dinosaur!

 

Given the sensitivity of the currently deployed ZO GPS and accelerometers, it should be possible to keep a boat on track. A servo buffer on the end of the steering cable connected to a PP or ZO controller can make the minor corrections needed.

 

The feel might suck If the controller aims for 1cm variation but keeping it reliably below the 20cm will feel normal. Will we need numbers and letters to customize the steering response? @The_MS will be undone.

 

Eric

[DanE]

@eleeski Below 20 cm won't cut it considering the cumulative component in the rules.

[MuskokaKy]

@dbutcher that class is called " no longer relevant" (Kidding of course)

 

@swc5150 never insulting...just comedy. my dad still think he throttle arm is better than PP. Generation sh*t talking is a regular on the dock. Our thing in common is Andy Mapple; from there we go opposite ways.

 

@eleeski i want to say I'm surprised by your opening line.....but than i remember you are a key man in any good thread debate....you keep it interesting.

[Horton]

@BraceMaker Take a moment to think about what it would cost. My guess it in the millions per lake plus maintenance. It makes boats look cheap.

[eleeski]

@DanE My comment was a reflection on why ZO is so hated. ZO is programmed for absolute perfection in timing. Instead of using the allowed and historical variations, ZO hammers the skier to stay far closer to actual than anything we had ever seen. Stargazer was horrible as well, hammering me at 5 to make up for a slow segment earlier - the end course was perfect. The grumbling has subsided now that we have a decade to adapt. But if ZO had used some of the tolerance (+- .03 instead of +- .01) to match previous driving styles (including PP Classic) the sport would be better off while still not violating the wording or spirit of the rules.

 

Working too hard for a path that is within electronic tolerance but does not resemble current hand steering feel would be an expensive disservice to the sport.

 

Some of the tolerance is there to protect the skiers from being hammered, steered into or jerked around, not to cheat a couple cm. Let's hope for a smooth consistent pull over a perfect path.

 

Eric

[eleeski]

@MuskokaKy I really need a cable so I can ski at my lake when I don't have a driver!

 

@BraceMaker I have a couple ideas on how to deal with the cable swing. If (when) I build a personal cable at my lake, I'll be sure to keep you posted.

 

@Horton Hopefully a non commercial system wouldn't be so expensive. Again, building one for my lake on my to do list, just not a super priority.

 

Eric

[DanE]

@eleeski Got it. Still can't use 20 cm as a treshold in a computer controlled system.

You will end up close to a 120 cm cumulative deviation assuming the system truly works and keeps a consistent weave from buoy to buoy.

[Horton]

@eleeski I 100% agree that the transition from PP to ZO was a catastrophic debacle. It was terrible because we had a situation where most skiers practiced PP and then competed with ZO. It was a hot mess but ZO is clearly better. I do not know any serious skier (except MS) who has ZO had wishes they could go back to PP. ZO is consistent and predictable unless the boat companies do something wacky.

 

When we get auto drive the thing the sport needs to avoid is a state where most skiers practice with hand steering and then compete with auto steering. That is assuming that auto steering is going to feel substantially different.

 

Having given this a lot of thought I suspect that for skiers not running into 39 off auto drive might not feel very different. I suspect that most of us practice with relatively random driving anyway. That is to be seen.

[eleeski]

@DanE I'm absolutely not saying we should have a weave programmed into an autosteer! That might feel even worse and violates the spirit of the rules. But if the boat is pulled off line, the correction should match the human and historical response, not the maximum robotic input.

 

@Horton I'm worried that a slavish electronic response seeking extraordinary tight tolerances will feel different. Using tolerances to mimic historically accepted style is not cheating and will keep the feel similar - even if a computer is capable of something different. Reality and history must be respected as much as the verbiage in the rule book.

 

Eric

[The_MS]

I do not want to go back to PP. I just want ZO to have 1 setting and for it to feel the same on all boats. It’s not asking much.

[Horton]

@The_MS why not have ZO options? On the other hand you can't blame ZO for the wacky feel of some of the new big motors.

[ral]

@BraceMaker, I would disagree regarding current technical inability to maintain a straight boat path In a slalom course. We do not have it now only because of a market size/money issue.

 

I work in Advanced Process Control. With Multivariable Process Control (MPC), stepper style calibration, as well as AI deep learning tools, you would get very fast a far better and repeatable average driving experience. Is it going to be better than what the best drivers from day 1? Probably not. But the vast majority of sets are nor pulled by world class drivers. Although most drivers/boar owners might think they are as good as it gets.

 

@BrennanKMN, on ZO being unfriendly in their first versions, we had loooong discussions in the early days. Reality is, the system was initially designed to keep constant speed, as the rule intent was, which is far less than desirable from a skiers point of view...

 

 

[JackQ]

Apparently I am in the minority, I had zero (no pun) issues adapting to ZO, even for the 2+ years I practiced behind PP and tournaments with ZO. Immediately the glide at gates at close to 34.2 vice almost 1mph hot was a significant improvement as well as having the boat waiting for you in a tailwind rather than running away from you. Still think more often the transition was more mental than physical.

 

However I am not looking for the cost and complications of auto steering, unless your driver is incapable of keeping the boat between the boat guides, boat path isn't a significant factor until 38, maybe a bit at 35.

[DanE]

@eleeski Oh but there will be a weave or limit there of programmed.

If there is zero weave, what exactly is the purpose of autosteer?

Zero weave = no reason for autosteer to respond.

While you make comparisons to ZO keep in mind while the times are near perfect the speed swing is substantial.

[The_MS]

1 setting, same feel in all boats. Simple.

[BraceMaker]

@ral I'd be very curious - my opinion is that no matter how fast it responds it is still reacting to deviation. To pull your buddies down the lake it is pretty simple, not really a programmed weave but really just have a second small rudder who's job is to refine the job the driver is doing. IE the driver runs down the lake largely doing not much and the second rudder is being driven by autopilot refining how centered up the boat is but not really doing the countersteering.

 

But to have a world class pull on autopilot I think you've got a much bigger problem, as you mention AI deep learning tools - give the computer a head start by uploading user profiles then you let the AI come up what skier profile X looks like. It won't be perfect in that everyone can have a day they ski differently but ideally during a run down the lake it has some other data to anticipate if something is off.