From: Engineering Dynamics Consultancy Ltd
Date: 11 April 2000
Re: 12 Seater Hovercraft
“Following our recent contact through the test programme I am writing to wish you success with the future of the craft and with future models. I was not only impressed by the fact that such a craft was being developed and manufactured in Christchurch, but also by the quality and aesthetics of the finished article. It was encouraging to see such commitment to getting things right when current pressures are on to reduce costs by sometimes perhaps making compromises on quality or integrity.
The hovercraft is built on sound engineering principles, has good structural integrity, and looks good. The choice of a wide chord propeller is good for low noise and being constructed from composite materials will give long life and protection against fatigue. I particularly liked the variable pitch mechanics for the prop, and ease of operation.
The soundness of the hull gives confidence that it will withstand severe shock loading and also provide good flotation in the unlikely event of a skirt collapse. I was further impressed that you had manufactured your own lift fan and that the skirt and hull design was such that the air pressure developed by the fan was so uniformly distributed as to give an almost level lift of.
I hope that you manage to build on the success of this unit and look forward to seeing more of your unique technology in the future.
Noise & Vibration”
From: Marine & Industrial Safety Inspection Services Ltd
Date: 29 February 2000
Re: Explorer 7.3 Hovercraft - Serial No. 01
“Between September 1999 and February 2000 we visited your premises at 200b Annex Road, Christchurch and witnessed various aspects of the construction of the above hovercraft.
During our visits we saw several stages of construction from the application of the first gel coat through to the completion of the vessel prior to performance testing. It is our opinion that a high standard of workmanship utilising accepted work practices was displayed throughout the project.
We consider this vessel to be of sound construction and suitable for private use carrying up to 12 personnel (including the driver) where sufficient safety equipment is provided.
It should be noted that the design of this vessel has not been assessed by this company.
Surveyor of Ships”
From: Marks & Associates Ltd
Date: 12 February 2003
Re: Pacific Hovercraft Explorer 12 - Assessment re Proposed Rule Part 40F
“We are pleased to advise, following from my attendance at two trials, two inspections and perusal of all documentation requested in relation to the above referred hovercraft, that it appears to meet all relevant requirements of proposed MSA Rule Part 40F.
As indicated to you earlier, this Rule has not yet been promulgated and it is not possible to issue a Certificate of Construction. Neither is it possible to formally approve the design. However, I am satisfied that if this Rule had been in force during my assessment of the hovercraft and my authority under the Rule was also in force, I would have approved both the design and construction in terms of Appendix 1 of the Rule as required under section 40F.7.
I draw your attention to other parts of the Rule that require proposed commercial hovercraft operations in New Zealand to be audited. These requirements are contained within sections 40F.5 to 40F.11 inclusive.
Please allow me to congratulate you, Nigel and your team on a good job well done. We wish you all every success in your expansion of your hovercraft ventures.
From: Dr Bernie Brenner
Date: 28 January 2003
“I would like to thank your company and in particular yourself, for the excellent service we have always been given.
Since the purchase of our hovercraft last year, you have always been available to offer help and assistance for any need we have required. To the extent that you made yourself available to “drive” our staff around Auckland harbour for our Christmas party on a day that was not quite the usual Auckland style. This was certainly over and above the call of duty.
We are very grateful for this extra service that you provide to your customer and thank you for providing it so willingly.
Dr Bernie Brenner”
From: Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury
Date: 11 April 2000
“To Whom It May Concern:
I have been involved with the design and testing of the propulsion fan for the Pacific Hovercraft “Explorer 12”. The fan is a low-speed, low noise design, using an aircraft variable pitch hub. I have spent a number of hours with the manufacturers during stationary duration testing and vibration monitoring of the machine, while this fan has been running.
During this time I have observed the considerable talent of the people at Pacific Hovercraft to solve small problems and get things done.
While this is the first machine of this size they have built, I have observed that they have a sound sense of the safety issues involved, and from my perspective they manage the human and technical risks appropriately for such a development.
Dr Keith Alexander”