See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/365233257

The surprising physics of reaction ferries - boats powered by their hulls.

Preprint · November 2022

CITATIONS READS

0 534

1 author:

Nicholas Landell-Mills
Independent Research
49 PUBLICATIONS 35 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Animal flight explained by Newtonian physics (flyers) View project

Swimming explained by Newtonian physics (Force = ma). View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nicholas Landell-Mills on 10 August 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The surprising physics of reaction ferries
– boats powered by their hulls.
Similar to how a sail generates a force from the wind,
the boat’s hull generates a force by re-directing water flow.

Mr. Nicholas Landell-Mills

29 July 2023
Pre-Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28853.35048;
CC License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Keywords: Boat, hydrodynamics, Newton, physics,
reaction ferry.
Independent Research
Donate via PayPal or buy me a coffee.

Fig. 1a. A reaction ferry crossing a river. [12] .

Abstract
The physics of how reaction ferries cross a river powered only by the river’s water flow, present a peculiar phenomenon that
is not well explained. This paper challenges the prevailing explanation, by asserting that reaction ferries generate a force
from their hulls re-directing water flow, similar to how a sailboat generates a force from the sail re-directing a headwind.
The only difference is that the reaction ferry uses its hull to create a force, and the sailboat uses its sail. The physics is also
the same as how albatrosses and gliders can soar into a headwind, gaining altitude and airspeed.

A key finding is that a reaction ferry’s hull is not optimized for re-directing fluid flow, as compared to a sail. The force
generated by the hull can be increased by adopting a hull with a rounded bow-shape with a pointed stern, with multiple hulls.
The boat is simply rotated 180°, as compared to the conventional orientation. A greater force from the same water flow,
allows for a faster river crossing and more widespread use of reaction ferries. This analysis is significant for those interested
in the physics of reaction ferries, sailing, and dynamic soaring by albatrosses and gliders.

1. INTRODUCTION Contents:

1. Introduction .......................................................... 1
A. Description of reaction ferries.
2. Background ........................................................... 2
Reaction ferries are boats with no motor or paddles that cross
3. The Prevailing Explanation ................................... 4
a river with ease using the river flow as its only source of power
and energy. Control and stabilizing cables across the river 4. Alternative Newtonian Solution............................ 6
prevent the ferry from being pushed downstream and do not
provide propulsion in any way. Reaction ferries see limited use 5. Discussion of Results ............................................ 8
and are only feasible where the water current is sufficiently fast.
See Fig. 1a.
6. Conclusions ........................................................... 9
7. Additional Information ......................................... 9

B. The same physics as sailing and soaring. 8. References........................................................... 10

Appendix I – Active and Passive Forces .................... 11
The physics of how a sailboat generates a force sailing into
the wind, by the sail re-directing a headwind is provided in Appendix II – Sailing into Wind ................................. 12
Appendix II. [3] This is similar to how an albatross generates a
force soaring into the wind. [2]

1
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

2. BACKGROUND A. The Coanda effect.

Fluid flow naturally follows a curved surface due to the

Coanda effect. For example, water falling from a tap is re-
directed by the curved side of a spoon demonstrating the Coanda
A. Description in more detail. effect, as illustrated in Fig. 2b-i.

A reaction ferry is a boat with no motor or paddles, which

crosses a river with ease using the river flow as its only source
of power and energy. See Fig. 2a-(i-ii).

Fig. 2b-i. Coanda effect – Spoon experiment.

According to Newtonian mechanics, the water flow passively

Fig. 2a-i. A reaction ferry crossing a river. [12]
re-directed by a spoon due to the Coanda effect creating a small
turning force due to the change in momentum of the water flow.
The reactive equal and opposite force pushes the spoon
diagonally to the left sideways and downward. The spoon pivots
to the left as far as the reactive force allows.

Wind tunnel experiments

Wind tunnel experiments demonstrate airflows arising due to

the Coanda effect on the topside of a curved airplane wing, as
well as turbulence that can arise. See Fig. 2b--ii.
Fig. 2a-ii. View upstream from the bow of
a reaction ferry crossing a river. [13]

Additional considerations include

- The stronger the river current, then the stronger the force
generated by the ferry.
- Both sides of the hull re-directs water flow around it.
- The ferry’s wake is turbulent and maintains the same Fig. 2b--ii. Airflow on curved and flat wings. [10][11]
direction as the ferry’s heading for some distance behind
the ferry. The wake does not dissipate quickly. In general, wings produce a stronger Coanda effect with
laminar (smooth / non-turbulent) airflow at a lower AOA, higher
- A control cable is attached from the ferry’s bow (front) to airspeed, and where the wings are deepest (largest chord, such as
a stabilizing cable, which crosses from bank-to-bank near the fuselage). Conversely, the Coanda effect is weakest at
across the river. The control helps to prevent the ferry high AOA, slower airspeeds, and where the wings are narrow
from being pushed downstream by the water flow. The (small chord, such as at the wing tips). See Fig. 2b--iii.
cable is not used to pull the ferry across the river.
- The angle-of-attack (AOA) is the angle between the hull’s
direction and the water flow.
- The tension on the control cable attached to the ferry
varies with the ferry’s AOA to the water flow. The control
cable is observed to slacken at times, when the AOA is
about 45°. In contrast, the control cable is taught when the
ferry heads into the river, giving a 0° AOA.
- The ferry has no rudder, and its direction is controlled by Fig. 2b--iii. Smooth vs. turbulent wing airflows. [10]
attaching the control cable to the upstream side of the bow
(front) of the ferry. The flat undersides of wings are typically designed to push air
down without inducing any Coanda effect.

2
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
B. Change in momentum illustrated using a car.
The explanation of the turning and reaction forces acting on
the spoon in the experiment above can also be illustrated using a
simple experiment of a car turning.
For example, if a car travelling in a straight line, turns at a
45° angle. At the point of turning, there is a change in
momentum of the car, which temporarily creates a turning force.
The equal and opposite reactive force acts sideways on the car,
which can cause a car to skid, flip over, or roll in a turn. The
reactive force is not in the initial direction of travel. In this
example, the car’s 45° change in direction produces a reactive
force acting perpendicular to the car’s new direction. See Fig.
2b-i.
Fig. 2b-i. Change in momentum
acting on a car turning.
The reactive force is evident from the car leaning into the
turn, as evident from the depressed tires on the side of the car
facing the sideways reactive force. See Fig. 2b-ii.
Fig. 2b-ii. Change in momentum
acting on a car turning. [25]
The driver of the car is a free-moving object within the car,
even if secured by a seat belt. Consequently, the force acting on
the driver is slightly different to the force acting on the car.
This argument explaining the forces acting on a car turning
can easily be tested and verified, it also explains drifting. Race
cars in a high-speed turn, point the wheels towards the direction
of the reactive force to reduce the drag/friction arising due to the
reactive force. Drifting reduces the amount that a car leans into
the turn, and therefore, reduces the possibility of flipping over.
See Fig. 2b-iii.
Fig. 2b-iii. Race car drifting in a high-speed turn. [8]
3
Using the car example above, the dynamics of the change in
momentum include: See Fig. 2b-iv.
1) A smaller deviation in the direction of travel produces a
smaller change in momentum. The smaller reactive force
acts on the car at a smaller angle to the initial direction
of travel.
2) Similarly, a larger deviation in the direction of travel
produces a larger change in momentum. The larger
reactive force acting on the car is at a larger angle to the
initial direction of travel.
Fig. 2b-iv. Change in momentum
acting on a car turning at different angles.
The same logic explaining the forces acting on the car can be
applied to explain the forces acting on a spoon in the experiment
above. A change in momentum from the water-flow’s path
altering along the spoon’s curved surface. See Fig. 2b-v.
Fig. 2b-v. Forces acting on a spoon
exposed to a water-flow.
Increasing the velocity of the water-flow in the spoon
experiment, increases the momentum of water-flow, causing the
following changes:
- The change in momentum experienced increases, and
therefore, the size of the reactive force acting on the
spoon increases.
- In addition, the Coanda effect can also increase, which
causes the water-flow to deviate at a wider angle. This
change then increases the size of the reactive force
further.
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
3. THE PREVAILING EXPLANATION
A. The prevailing explanation.
The prevailing explanation of the physics is straightforward,
which is based on Newtonian mechanics.
The control cable is attached to one side of the ferry so that
the ferry adopts a positive AOA. i.e. The hull has a slight
asymmetrical profile relative to the water flow and does not face
directly into the water flow. The hull provides minimum drag
resistance to the water flow with this profile/heading. This
action exposes one side of the ferry to a greater amount of water
flow. See Fig. 3a-i.
Fig. 3a-i. Description of a reaction
ferry crossing a river.
The description of the forces acting on the ferry is as follows:
See Fig. 3a-ii.
- The water flow pushes against the upstream side of the
ferry, which deflects the water flow at angle. This action
exerts a force on the ferry (Force WATER).
- The reaction generates and equal and opposite force in
the desired forward direction (Force FORWARD).
- The water flow slows down slightly as it hits the ferry.
Momentum is transferred from the water flow to the
ferry, to generate the ferry’s motion.
Fig. 3a-ii. Prevailing view of the forces
acting on a reaction ferry.
4
B. Problems with the prevailing view – Forces.
However, theoretical problems with this explanation exist, as
described below:
- The ferry’s forward motion is approximately stable,
indicating that the forces are in balance.
- There is no explanation of what force resists the force
exerted by the water flow on the ferry (Force WATER). In
the absence of any resistance, no forward motion is
possible.
In other words, the control cable provides the resistance
needed to hold the bow of the ferry in place against the
force exerted by the water flow. But what prevents the
stern of the ferry from being pushed downstream? Why
doesn’t the water flow pushing against the upstream side
of the ferry, simply push the stern downstream?
- The force exerted by the water flow against the ferry
(Force WATER) is unlikely to be perpendicular to the water
flow, as described by the prevailing explanation. Instead,
the direction of the Force WATER should be diagonally
upstream. Therefore, the equal and opposite force (Force
FORWARD) is diagonally downstream. This situation
makes more sense, as the water flow pushes the ferry
downstream and sideways. See Fig. 3b-i.
Fig. 3b-i. Revised forces acting
on a reaction ferry.
In this position, the control cable is attached to the ferry
and would be taught for the duration of the crossing,
which is not the case, as explained below.
The revised direction of the forces acting on the ferry
highlight the question as to what is resisting the force
from the water flow (Force WATER). In the absence of any
resistance, the Force WATER would push the stern of the
ferry in the direction of the water flow, and no forward
motion would be possible. See Fig. 3b-ii.
Fig. 3b-ii. Water flow pushing the stern
of the ferry backwards.
In this position, the ferry is facing upstream. There is no
progress by the ferry across the river. The ferry’s hull
offers the least resistance possible to the water flow. The
control cable provides all the resistance to the water
flow. The forces acting on the ferry are in balance.
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

- No equation is provided to calculate the forces involved.

- The water flow on the downstream side of the ferry, - The argument presented is entirely theoretical. No
facing the direction of travel, is ignored. attempt is made to provide an example calculation of the
forces involved to verify that the theory is correct.
- The prevailing explanation cannot explain why ferries
with square-shaped hulls require two control cables; one
at the bow and one at the stern. See Fig. 3b-(iii-v).

C. Problems with the prevailing view – Observations.

In addition, the prevailing explanation does not fit with what

is observed in practice. The prevailing explanation cannot
explain:
- The control cable is observed to slacken frequently as
the ferry crosses the river. This observation indicates
that the ferry is not experiencing a significant
downstream force from the water flow (Force WATER). In
Fig. 3b-iii. Old square-hulled reaction addition, it also indicates that the ferry may be
ferry with 2 control cables. [14] generating a forward force to offset the downstream
force.
- The turbulent wake behind the stern of the ferry
continues diagonally across the river from a significant
distance. This fact indicates that the downstream side of
the ferry re-directs the water flow.
- The control cable is observed to stay approximately in
front of the ferry. The ferry is not dragging the cable
behind it at a wide angle.

D. Problems with fluid mechanics.

Fig. 3b-iv. Modern square-hulled
reaction ferry with 2 control cables.
Unlike the (incorrect) prevailing explanations for the physics
of sailing into the wind and how airplane wings generate lift,
fluid mechanics (Navier-Stokes) equations are not used to
explain the physics of reaction ferries.

The prevailing explanations of how a reaction ferry generates

a force are based on Newtonian mechanics, as described above.
In contrast, the prevailing explanations for how a sail generates
a force when sailing into the wind are based on fluid mechanics
or vector based solutions, not Newtonian mechanics.
[1][20][21][22] See Fig. 3d.

Fig. 3b-v. Illustration of old reaction

ferry with 2 control cables.

The second control cable, at the stern of the ferry,

provides significant insight that illuminates how the
forces act to create forward motion.
The second cable provides resistance to the deflected
water flow on the upstream side of the hull, preventing
the stern from being pushed downstream. In turn, this
second cable allows for the equal and opposite force to Fig. 3d. False vector-based solutions
be created, as described by the prevailing explanation and fluid mechanics.
above.
Consequently, the prevailing explanation can adequately
explain the forces acting on an old reaction ferry with a It is inconsistent for the prevailing explanations to use such a
square-shaped hull, but not a reaction ferry with a large variety of explanations for how a force is generated by a
modern tear-drop shaped hull. sail, wing, or hull.

The propulsion of some modern reaction ferries can be

assisted by propellers or pulley cables.

5
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
4. ALTERNATIVE NEWTONIAN SOLUTION
A. Passive and active forces.
A wing, hull or sail can passively or actively generate a force,
as explained in Appendix I. A reaction ferry’s hull, a sail and an
albatross wing passively generate a force by re-directing fluid
flow. See Fig. 4a-i.
Fig. 4a-i Newtonian forces passively
generated by a sail or wing, and
the hull of a reaction ferry.
The Newtonian approach described above explains:
- How a forward force is generated by a boat’s hull re-
directing water flow.
- Why so much turbulence arises behind the boat.
- What happens to the forces and energy created by the
turbulence.
Sails of boats re-directing relative airflow (wind) when
sailing into the wind, is similar to the physics for how the hull of
a reaction ferry generates a force from relative water flow.
See a description of the physics of sailing in Appendix II.
Reaction ferry
According to Newtonian mechanics, a reaction ferry’s hull
facing into the river’s water flow with positive AOA, passively
re-directs the moving mass of water each second (m/dt),
backwards around the boat’s hull. This action is helped by the
Coanda effect on the leeward side of the hull.
Behind the boat’s stern, the re-directed water flow pushes
against the undisturbed water from the river, causing the re-re-
directed water to decelerate (dv) and creating turbulence. This
action creates a backwards force (Force BACK).
The reaction, due to the inertia of the wind that decelerated,
generates an equal and opposite forward force (Force FORWARDS
or Thrust) that pushes the boat ahead, as described by the
equations: See Fig. 4a.
Force BACK = ma = m/dt * dv
= Force FORWARDS (Thrust)
Simplified to: Thrust = m/dt * dv
6
It is that simple. The hull extracts momentum from the river
by slowing down the speed of the water flow. The momentum
transferred to the boat pushes it forwards across the river.
The thrust generated is in the same direction as the water flow
re-directed, and not directly across the river, perpendicular to the
water flow.
Mass flow rate (m/dt)
‘m/dt’ is a product of the volume of water re-directed each
second by the hull and the water density. The volume of water
re-directed depends on: water speed, angle-of-attack (AOA)
between the hull and water flow, hull thickness, and hull length.
‘m/dt’ increases with water speed, and therefore, the force
generated is time-dependent. i.e. The force generated depends on
the amount of water passed through by the hull each second.
Consequently, the force generated is expressed as the mass flow
rate ‘m/dt’, and not as the mass ‘m’.
Downwash velocity (dv)
‘dv’ depends primarily on the reduction in water speed due to
AOA, and hull length. ‘dv’ arises due to a one-off force
(impulse) from the interaction of the water behind the ferry.
Therefore, ‘dv’ is not time-dependent; and not expressed as
deceleration ‘dv/dt’. ‘dv’ does not change if the time period is
altered.
Facing directly into the wind/river.
When sailing directly into the wind (in irons), the wind
pushes the sail relatively flat. The sail is not re-directing any
wind (no m/dt and dv arise), and therefore, no forward force is
generated (Force = m/dt * dv). See Fig. 4a-ii.
Fig. 4a-ii. Sailing directly into the wind.
B. Facing into the wind/river.
Sailing into the wind, provides a proxy to explain the physics
of reaction ferries.
Sails generate a greater force when sailing almost directly
into the wind, as compared to sailing on a broad reach, as
described below. The same logic applies to the hulls of reaction
ferries when generating a force.
According to Newtonian mechanics, the optimum sail
position is one that maximizes the combined airflow re-directed
by both the windward and leeward sides of the sail.
The airflow on the leeward side of the sail is the most
sensitive to changes in sail AOA, and therefore, the forward
force generated as well as the boat’s speed.
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

Fig. 4b-iii Positive feedback loop

Fig. 4b-i. Coanda effect is stronger on a close haul. sailing closer into the wind.

Sailing closer into the wind with a lower sail AOA allows
boats to sail faster because: See Fig. 4b-i. 4)
1) On a beam reach, more sail on the windward side is
directly exposed to the wind, increasing ‘m/dt’ on the
windward side. However, the sail AOA is much greater, 5)
so the apparent-wind is re-directed through a much
greater angle, reducing ‘dv’ significantly. More of the
apparent-wind’s force is lost to pushing the boat
sideways, rather than forward.
The sailboat heels (tilts) less and moves more efficiently
through the water with less drag than when on a close
haul.
The Coanda effect is greatest when sailing closest to the
wind, but not directly into or with the true wind. See Fig.
4b-v.

2) The Coanda effect on the leeward side of the sail is

highly sensitive to the sail’s AOA. On a close haul, there
is less turbulence and airflow separation, and therefore,
more air displaced (higher m/dt and dv) on the leeward
part of the sail.
On a closer haul, the lower sail AOA deflects the
apparent-wind at a lower angle. Therefore, it loses less
of its force and maximizes ‘dv’.
Fig. 4b-v. The Coanda effect and sail AOA.
3) A positive feedback loop arises as the boat sails closer
into the wind. The mass of air sailed through each In addition, when sailing downwind, the Coanda effect
second (m/dt) increases due to the Coanda effect on the on the leeward side of the sail increases significantly
leeward side of the sail. This causes an increase the once the boat starts sailing faster than the wind. This
generated forward force (Force = m/dt * dv), and change is due to the apparent-wind shifting towards the
therefore, the boat’s speed. See Fig. 4b-ii. bow (front) of the boat as the boat’s speed increases.

6) The leeward airflow experiences little turbulence, as it is

protected by the sail from the apparent-wind. This aspect
allows the leeward side to displace the air backwards
more effectively, as compared to the windward side. See
Fig. 4b-vi.

Fig. 4b-ii. Lower sail AOA feedback loop.

As the boat’s speed increases, ‘m/dt’ and ‘dv’ increase

further, causing a greater increase in the forward force
generated (Force = m/dt * dv). In turn, this pushes the
boat ahead at a higher speed. See Fig. 4b-iii.
Fig. 4b-vi. Little turbulence n the leeward side.
The impact of the positive feedback loop on the boat’s
speed is greatest at low speeds. This is because drag on
the hull from the water is proportional to the boat’s In summary, turning a sail into the wind is like pressing down
velocity squared. Therefore, as the boat's speed increases on the accelerator pedal of a car. The sail is more efficient at
to a high velocity, drag increases rapidly. creating a forward force as it re-directs a greater mass of air each
second (m/dt) on the leeward side at a higher relative velocity
The exponential nature of drag explains why hydrofoils (dv). This is despite reduced ‘m/dt’ on the windward side on a
are essential for any high-speed sailboat. Hydrofoils closer haul.
minimize drag by raising the hull above the water.

7
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
5. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
A. Hull shape.
It should not be surprising that Newtonian mechanics can
explain the physics of how reaction ferries cross rivers.
In summary, evidence indicates that a rectangular-shaped
ferry hull is sub-optimal for generating a force to cross a river.
This aspect arises because the hull does not re-direct water flow
on the leeward side of the hull.
In contrast, a conventional teardrop-shaped hull is more
efficient at generating a larger force from the same water flow.
This aspect arises because the hull re-directs water flow on the
leeward side of the hull, helped by the Coanda effect. See Fig.
5a-i.
Fig. 5a-i Efficiency of hull shapes.
Hulls shaped like sails?
Analysis indicates that a reaction ferry’s hull is not optimized
for re-directing fluid flow, as compared to a sail. The hulls could
be re-designed to generate a greater force from the same water
flow, allowing for a faster river crossing and more widespread
use of reaction ferries.
However, sails have an asymmetrical shape, which make
them an inappropriate hull shape for crossing rivers in both
directions. The shape would work well in one direction across
the river, but not the other. See Fig. 5a-ii.
Fig. 5a-ii Sail shaped hull generates
forces that only function well in
one direction across a river.
Consequently, given that the bow of the boat is always
heading upstream, it is likely that the conventional teardrop-
shaped hulls are an ideal compromise to generate the optimal
force to cross a river.
8
B. Hull orientation.
Two hull orientations are compared: See Fig. 5b.
1) The conventional hull orientation is with a sharp (pointed)
bow-shape with a rounded stern. The Coanda effect is
likely to be weak at the front of the boat due to the pointed
stern.
2) A proposed hull orientation includes a rounded bow-shape
with a pointed stern. The boat is simply rotated 180°, as
compared to the conventional orientation. This orientation
is similar to symmetrical wing designs found on aerobatic
airplanes, and the shape of fish (with big heads and
tapered, thin tails).
Due to the Coanda effect on the amount of water re-
directed, this orientation re-directs a greater mass of water
each second (greater m/dt), and therefore, generates a
greater force (force = m/dt * dv).
In addition, the pointed stern of the hull focuses the re-
directed water flow on to itself much more. This dynamic
slows down the re-directed water to a greater extent
(higher dv) and creates more turbulence. In theory, this
should then generate a greater force (Force = m/dt * dv).
To maximize the Coanda effect, a rounded bow at the
front of the hull facing the water flow is optimal.
Fig. 5b Conventional and proposed
hull orientation compared.
C. Multiple hulls – Catamaran designs.
Some reaction ferries have hulls with catamaran designs, with
two thin hulls. According to Newtonian mechanics, two hulls
should approximately double the mass of water re-directed each
second (double m/dt), and slowed down, creating more
turbulence. Therefore, this approach generates a greater force
from the water flow (Force = m/dt * dv). See Fig. 5c.
Fig. 5c Reaction ferry with catamaran hulls. [17]
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
6. CONCLUSIONS
A. Force generated.
A reaction ferry extracts momentum and energy from the
river. In the absence of any reliable data from experimentation,
it is impossible to be certain whether the predominant forces
acting on a reaction ferry is due to:
- The change in momentum of the water flow re-directed
by the bull, assisted by the Coanda effect.
- The force generated by the turbulence behind the hull,
from the re-directed water flow.
According to Newtonian mechanics, the hull of a reaction
ferry passively generates a force by re-directing fluid flow,
similar to how a sail generates a force on a boat sailing into the
wind. The force generated can be expressed as a function of the
mass of water re-directed each second (m/dt), and the velocity
(dv) to which the water decelerates behind the boat (Thrust =
m/dt * dv). See Fig 6a.
Fig. 6a. Thrust generated by
a reaction ferry’s hull.
B. Ideal reaction ferry design.
According to Newtonian mechanics and the analysis provided
above, the ideal reaction ferry design that generates the greatest
force (forward thrust) from a river’s water flow, would have
multiple hulls with rounded bows and pointed sterns. See Fig.
6b.
Fig. 6b. Ideal hull orientation and design
for a reaction ferry.
As compared to a single hulled boat with a conventional
alignment, as shown in Fig. 6a above. The proposed ideal design
would re-direct a greater amount of water flow each second on
to itself, slow this water flow down more to create a greater
amount of turbulence, and therefore, steal more momentum from
the river.
9
7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Author: Mr. Nicholas Landell-Mills, independent researcher.
Corresponding email: nicklandell66@gmail.com
Personal background: The author is British, currently living
in France, and was born in 1966 in Botswana. The author is
dyslexic.
Academic qualifications: The author is a graduate of The
University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. He was awarded a
M.A. degree class 2:1 in economics and economic history in
1989.
Professional background: The author qualified as an
accountant (ACA) in England & Wales, as well as a Chartered
Financial Analyst (CFA). He worked in finance for 24 years in
numerous countries for different companies.
Author Contributions: This paper is entirely the work of
the author, Mr. Nicholas Landell-Mills.
Affiliations: None.
Acknowledgements: None.
Disclaimer: All data in the manuscript is authentic, there are
no conflicts of interest, and all sources of data used in the paper
are identified where possible.
ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4814-0443
Project duration: This paper is one of the products of nine
years research in applied physics (2014 – 2023) into how objects
fly, sail, fall, and swim.
Funding: This paper was self-funded by the author.
Project costs: The direct expenses used to write this paper
were minimal and included things like a computer, internet
access, and living expenses. However, the opportunity cost of
the salary forgone by not being employed while conducting the
research for over eight years, was substantial.
Request for financial support: This paper could not have
been produced through the established academic and scientific
systems. There is no intention to publish this paper or its
contents in an academic journal, as then it would no longer be
available for free to all. If you found this research to be useful,
valuable, informative, entertaining, or otherwise worthy. Then
kindly thank, support, and encourage the author with a financial
donation via:
- PayPal.com at: https://paypal.me/landell66
- Or buy me a coffee: https://bmc.link/zhJIg4zRCW
Thank you!
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

8. REFERENCES

[1] NASA, Glenn Research Centre. www.grc.nasa.gov

Unpublished papers by the author:

[2] N Landell-Mills (2019), Albatross’ dynamic soaring explained by
Newton. Pre-Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.29669.55527.
[3] N Landell-Mills (2019), How boats sail faster than the wind; Pre-
Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33918.33600 .
[4] N Landell-Mills (2021), Galilean relativity revisited using wings.
Pre-Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19517.38886.
[5] N Landell-Mills (2021), Relative airflow analysis is flawed. Pre-
Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19517.38886
[6] N Landell-Mills (2023), A classic wind tunnel experiment re-
evaluated. Pre-Print DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.31272.03846 .
[7] Removed.

Additional references:
[8] Image from Wiki Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/
[9] Source: jetphotos.net
[10] Image licensed from Critical Past; www.criticalpast.com .
[11] Source: youtube: Phoenix FD 3.0 - Wind Tunnel; Nov 2016;
https://youtu.be/IOLaoHbuVGY
[12] Reaction ferries are really clever; uploaded: Oct 2, 2017;
YouTube channel: Tom Scott; https://youtu.be/b6utGZQ9Sks .
[13] Current Powered Reaction Ferries | What and How in 4 Minutes;
Apr 8, 2022; YouTube Channel: Run That Mile;
https://youtu.be/5aOyKBkwfgI .
[14] Photo by Townsend Godsey from Ozark Mountain Folk.
https://thelibrary.org/lochist/periodicals/bittersweet/fa79k.htm . This space was intentionally left blank.
[15] Cape Horn Engineering, UK; www.cape-horn-eng.com
[16] Fraser yachts. www.fraseryachts.com.
[17] Image taken from the official website of the Government of
British Columbia; https://www2.gov.bc.ca/
[18] PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay.
[19] Image by ron-dauphin from unsplash.
[20] Wolfgang Püschl, High-speed sailing, Published 8 May 2018,
European Physical Society, European Journal of Physics, Volume
39, Number 4
[21] Byron Anderson, The physics of sailing into the wind, Physics
Today Magazine, Feb 2008. Volume 61, Issue 2, Page 38, DOI:
10.1063/1.2883908.
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.2883908
[22] Ryan M. Wilson, The Physics of Sailing, JILA and Department of
Physics, University of Colorado, USA, February 7, 2010.
[23] 'SPECTACULAR! A-380 Condensation and Vortices on Landing
at Zurich Kloten Airport,' uploaded on 15 Jul 2017, on youtube
channel PlanesWeekly. Link:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaRb46vv_bQ
[24] How Does A Plane Wing Work? Uploaded on 14 Jun 2019, to
youtube, on the channel DaveHax. https://youtu.be/ufeky6EIXQ4
[25] Funniest Moments at the Nürburgring Nordschleife WEIRD Cars,
Crazy & Funny Drivers; YouTube channel: statesidesupercars;
Jan 8, 2023; https://youtu.be/puXr--34Qw0
[26] Removed.

10
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
APPENDIX I – PASSIVE AND ACTIVE FORCES
A. Analysis of actual wing airflows.
Airplane wings are used to explain passive and active forces.
Contrary to the prevailing view that favours relative airflow
analysis to explain the forces generated by an airfoil in all
situations. The actual airflows observed from a wing in flight
through static air are significantly different to the airflows seen
from a wing exposed to a relative airflow (headwind) in a wind
tunnel. Consequently, the resultant forces are also different.
Galilean invariance does not apply in this situation. See Fig. I-a-
(i-ii).
Fig. I-a-i. Actual wing airflows analysed. [9]
Fig. I-a-ii. The passive and active creation
of forces based on actual airflows.
In both situations, the resultant forces can be described by the
same Newtonian equation (Force = m/dt * dv) as explained
below. See Fig. I-a-ii.
1) A mass of air each second (m/dt) from oncoming relative
airflow (headwind) can be passively re-directed by a
stationary airfoil. This airflow decelerates (dv) on contact
with the undisturbed wind at the trailing edge of the airfoil
to produce turbulence. This action creates a backward
force (Force BACK = m/dt * dv), and therefore, a reactive
equal and opposite forward thrust is also generated.
For example, a sailboat, wind turbine blade, and a glider
wing soaring into the wind can passively generate forward
thrust by re-directing a relative airflow (headwind).
2) A moving airfoil can actively accelerate a mass of static
air each second (m/dt) flown through to a velocity (dv)
11
diagonally down and slightly forwards. This action creates
a downward force (Force DOWN = m/dt * dv). The reactive
equal and opposite upward force generated (Force UP)
provides lift. For example, this is how an airplane wing
can generate lift.
This paper describes airflows actively created by a wing in
flight as absolute airflows, to differentiate them from the
relative airflows experienced in wind tunnels.
In other words, sailboats and airplane wings generate
different airflows, and therefore, generate different forces. For
example, doubling the number sails doubles the thrust generated
by a sailboat, but doubling the number of wings on an airplane
increases the lift generated only a little.
The key differences between passive and active forces include:
- The direction of the force generated by an active force is
almost perpendicular to the wing’s alignment. But passive
forces generate thrust in a similar direction as the wing.
- Momentum is transferred from the relative airflow (wind)
to the wing in passive force generation, and vice versa in
active force generation.
- The wake airflows produced are different:
The passive forces arising from relative airflow, produces
wake airflow turbulence at the trailing edge of the wing.
In contrast, the active forces arising from the static air
accelerated downwards by a wing in flight, produces
laminar wake airflow, which is only turbulent at the centre
of the two wingtip vortices. See Fig. I-a-iii.
Fig. I-a-iii. Turbulent vs. smooth
wake airflows. [8][23]
To put it another way, the prevailing method by fluid
mechanics using relative wing airflow analysis (which is based
on wind tunnel experiments) to analyse how an airplane wing
generates vertical lift in flight, is flawed for the reasons
described below:
- Relative wing airflow diagrams and analysis fail to
explain the actual wing airflows observed in flight and
the resultant forces generated. [5]
In particular, wake airflow turbulence observed in wind
tunnel experiments behind the trailing edge of the wing,
is not observed behind wings in flight.
- A re-evaluation of wind tunnel experiments shows that
the prevailing view of how a wing accelerates the upper
and lower airflows is false. [6]
Instead, relative airflows over a wing are shown to passively
generate turbulence and forward thrust according to Newtonian
mechanics.
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

B. Example calculation.
APPENDIX II – SAILING INTO WIND
The example calculation below demonstrates the Newtonian
approach applied to sailing.

A. Newtonian mechanics. It is assumed that: See Fig. II-b-i.

- Apparent wind is 10 m/s,
According to Newtonian mechanics, boats sailing into the - The wind decelerates to 0 m/s.
wind on a close haul tack at a positive sail AOA, passively re- - Air density is 1.2 kg/m3.
direct a moving mass of air each second (m/dt) from the - Sail 12 m high.
apparent wind backwards, helped by the Coanda effect on the - Sail reach of 1 m; which means the wind is re-directed
leeward side of the sail. 0.5 m on either side of the sail.

The re-directed air pushes against the undisturbed air from

the apparent wind, causing the wind to decelerate (dv) and
turbulence. This action creates a backwards force (Force BACK).

The reaction, due to the inertia of the wind that decelerated,

generates an equal and opposite forward force (Force FORWARDS
or Thrust) that pushes the boat ahead, as described by the
equations: See Fig. II-a-(i-ii).
Force BACK = ma = m/dt * dv
= Force FORWARDS (Thrust) Fig. II-b-i. Volume of air re-directed by the sail.

Simplified to: Thrust = m/dt * dv

Example calculation:

The sail displaces a volume of air each second of 120 m3/s:

Volume/dt = Height * Sail Reach * Wind Speed
= 12m * 1m * 10 m/s
= 120 m3/s

This volume of air displaced equals a mass of 144 kg/s of air:

m/dt = Volume/dt * Air Density
= 120 m3/s * 1.2 kg/m3
Fig. II-a-i. Newtonian forces = 144 kg/s
acting on a sailboat. 1
If the apparent wind re-directed by the sail slowed by 8 m/s
(dv). Then a backward force of 1,152 N is generated, as shown
by the equation: See Fig. II-b-ii.

Force BACK = m/dt * dv

= 144 kg/s * 8 m/s
= 1,152 N

Fig. II-a-ii. Newtonian forces

acting on a sailboat. 2

Simply put, the forward force (thrust) generated depends

primarily on the amount and speed of air re-directed by the sail.
This description of the main force created by the sail is separate
to the two smaller sideways and turning forces, as described
below.
Fig. II-b-ii. Example calculation
Momentum is transferred from the wind to the sail, to push of Newtonian forces.
the boat ahead.
The reaction generates an equal and opposite forward force of
The force generated by the sail pushes against the turbulence 1,152 N, as shown by the equation:
behind the sail, and not directly against the sail as commonly
believed. Force BACK = 1,152 N = Force FORWARD

12
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.
C. Three forces created by a sail.
Fig. II-c-i. Redirected airflows create
multiple forces acting on an airfoil (sail).
Fig. II-c-ii. Backwards and sideways forces.
According to Newtonian mechanics, the forces arising from
the two airflows re-directed by the sail, on the windward and
leeward sides, can be described as follows: See Fig. II-c-(i-ii).
1) The leeward airflow when redirected by the Coanda
effect exerts a small sideways force on the sail. This force
is due to a secondary change in direction and momentum
of the airflow; which generates an equal and opposite
force near the leading edge of the sail. See Fig. II-c-iii.
On a sailboat this force pulls the sail outwards away from
the boat, keeping the sail fully inflated. In other words,
this is the force that pulls the sail sideways, towards the
Coanda effect.
The change in momentum can be calculated using the
standard Newtonian equation based on the mass (m) and
velocity (v) of the water re-directed each second (dt); as
summarized by the equation: Force = ma = d(mv)/dt .
Fig. II-c-iii. Computer simulations of
the Coanda effect. [15]
13
2) As the windward airflow is deflected by the sail, the force
generated exerts a small downwind force on the sail. This
is the force pushing the boat directly downwind causing
the boat to tilt, which is opposed by the boat’s hull and
keel. See Fig- II-c-(iv-v).
Fig. II-c-iv. Two forces acting on a
sail on a close haul tack.
Fig. II-c-v. Resistance from the
hull and keel.
To put it another way, on a close haul tack into the wind,
the sail re-directs most of the wind’s momentum and
energy backwards. Only a relatively small downwind
force is applied directly against the sail, pushing the boat
downwind, creating a downwind force.
The downwind force is resisted by the boat’s hull and keel,
which limits the drift and prevents the boat from being
blown in the same direction as the wind. The resistance
from the keel also prevents sailboats from tilting and
tipping over. The weight of the keel also helps to keep the
centre of mass lower and close to the water level.
3) The main force generated is achieved by the sail
redirecting both the leeward and windward airflows from
the wind to the stern (back) of the sailboat. See Fig- II-c-
vi.
This action creating turbulence and slows down the wind.
The force generated is summarized by the equation:
Thrust = m/dt * dv.
Fig. II-c-vi. The windward and leeward
airflows re-directed backwards.
 Independent Research – The surprising physics of reaction ferries – boats powered by their hulls.

D. Catamarans do not need a keel. F. Relative speeds.

Catamarans sailing into the wind without a keel demonstrate When sailing closer into the wind with a lower sail AOA, a
that the keel is not always required to oppose the sideways force. boat’s speed can increase significantly and up to several
Instead, two separate hulls are used to prevent the boat from multiples of the wind’s speed. This feat occurs because the force
tipping over, and to provide resistance to the sideways force, for generated by the sail is not limited to the speed of the wind. For
two reasons: example, a sailboat sailing at 12 km/hr on close haul into a 10
km/hr wind, could be travelling at 20 km/hr relative to the wind.
- The leeward hull in the water itself provides resistance
See Fig. II-f.
to the sideways force, preventing the catamaran from
being pushed downwind, similar to a boat with a keel.
- The 2nd hull that is out of the water on the windward side
provides balance and prevents the boat from tipping
over. The hull in the water acts as a pivot against the
sideways force. This replicates the benefits of a keel. See
Fig. II-d-(i-ii).

Fig. II-f. Illustration of relative speeds.

G. Multiple sails.

This Newtonian approach can explain why multiple sails (e.g.

jib and mainsheet) provide a greater forward force than a single,
Fig. II-d-i. Catamarans sail into large sail with the same total sail area.
the wind without a keel.
Specifically, multiple sails increase the mass flow rate (m/dt)
without significantly jeopardizing the relative acceleration of air
(dv). This configuration also enhances airflow on the leeward
side of the sail, reducing turbulence and flow separation. A
higher ‘m/dt’ then increases the overall force generated using
the Newtonian equation: Force = m/dt * dv. See Fig. II-g-(i-ii).

Fig. II-d-ii. The forces on a catamaran

sailing into the wind.

E. Albatrosses dynamic soaring.

Albatrosses dynamic soaring is subject to similar physics as a Fig. II-g-i. One large sail vs.
boat sailing into the wind. If boats can sail into the wind two sails (mainsheet and jib).
without a keel, it should not be surprising that birds can achieve
dynamic soaring. A common error in comparing the physics of a
sailboat and an albatross is to confuse the headings and
directions of the forces involved. See Fig. II-e.

Fig. II-g-ii. Boats with multiple sails. [18][19]

Fig. II-e. A boat and albatross

sailing/flying into the wind.

14

View publication stats