"Hugely susceptible" would be my humble opinion.
Not being able to actually monitor condition, followed
by how do you repair it?
Your first operational video did show IMHO a "tendency to nose down".
All (as ever) IMHO---
Your bow skirt geometry appears to my eyes to be adding to the nose down tendency.
I am sure adjustment to the COGravity/COCushion could improve slow/static attitude, but will not solve the speed collapse of the plough in
but to my eyes the frwd fingers seem to fold back under with friction.
Either on shore or on water-at speed- the frictional grab comes into play.
Once the finger starts to fold back, it offers more surface area to this effect, aggravating this fold back tendency.
As the front skirt fingers deform back (under) the craft, the centre of cushion is altered - worsening the effect.
Are fingers AS per TS3 design or have they been altered,?Is there any reason the craft HAS to have multiple BOW fingers, and could it NOT have just one finger?---ie a a SEV front curtain?
The curtain could have the angulation copied from the Sevs? I WAS considering this for KingFisher
TS3s normally seem to hover well on static especially with a big engine sitting over the area in question.
As a frontal skirt "folds" the Centre of cushion should IMHO move "forwards" i.e. a SEVs fold of the frontal curtain moves the point FORWARDS - thus proportionally increasing the tendency to lift the front.
IF the point moves rearwards (as it does in your film) it moves the centre of cushion the "wrong way" making ploughin inevitable
35 years ago---- I also added a cover over the liftal frontal zone of a Falcon with separate lift engine.
This made the lift noise decrease (as desired) but so did usable LIFT.
ONCE the
lift engine was powered up to make allowance for this "strangulation to entry zone"
the noise was if anything - worse.
The craft was now heavier at the front, and just didn't seem to be able to deliver sufficient volume / pressure, especially when a large lump of lift was needed to replace lost air.
So OFF came my expensive cowling, lightening the front, delivering more usable air
just like Kip Mccollum said it would!
KISS !
THIS was 35 YEARS AGO!
After all that cost and effort, I NOW always pay SPECIAL attention to avoiding air flow constriction.
We have grown "So Used To" SEVs delivering their incredible skirt efficiency, that other skirt systems seem to be unable to deliver comparable performance.
IMHO "others" don't compare mainly because
Barry Palmers designed Sevs are breathtakingly good.
Trying to improve "non sev type systems" will only ever
tinker with systems designed MANY years ago.
IMHO they will never be as good.
Ive spent my early years with finger skirts, with their +ses, -ses. (including my KingFisher)
Ive spent my last three years with the Otter (sev derivative) skirt, with pluses and minarses,,,
And I vote TOTALLY for
Sev / Otter bag divider and curtain with rear lift supply and C of Cushion set BACK to allow for its anti plough systems to operate..WE are still modifying improving and thinking about our systems BUT the basics are THERE now.
We now only look how easiest to monitor, and service.
Just done year skirt service- good for a few hundred more miles.