Mark, Herb, Here’s a thought. A while back someone posted about two conventional fins in series instead of the thruster setup. I had seen it before and shrugged it off. Also, a while back I posted about the profile surface area of fin clusters and how the center of lateral resistance might give you a numerical basis for how far forward or backward you located the fin cluster (twins or 3’s) (my post was widely ignored, probably for cause)(except for Ambrose who I mistook for dis’ing my post and for which I am truly sorry) Here is the thought. What if, instead of two big fins in line, you used a series of MVG’s with profile surface area equal to that of a conventional set up? Maybe 4 or 5 MVG’s in line for what would replace a single fin setup? Maybe 3 or 4 in line in the three places where you would otherwise put a thruster setup? Wouldn’t an array of small MVG’s and SC’s be faster and, as long as you had the surface area to push off of, you’d still have the drive? Should this post be widely ignored? Just a thought.
The MVGs and Superchargers are only about a knuckle tall. Without much depth to the fin(s) leaning the board over may be the end of your ride. These finlets work best in synergy with more traditional fins. I’ve used MVGs exclusively on my son’s (5) board but am considering adding bonzer-like plywood side fins for more turning stablility. Single fins in series is a neat idea and I’ve always thought a 12’ board should have two center fin boxes to play with. Rob Olliges
…SCs and MVGs are not fins at all. …In it of themselves are worthless in drive,stability or steering. …The MVGs and SCs create a draft,a flow which allows the user to more completely utilize the main fins .Herb
A similar idea has crossed my mind also. My thoughts were, instead of one fin with a large base, use several fins with small bases, spaced apart, but inline. It’s kind of hard to explain so here is a sketch. I haven’t had a chance to try this, and I’m worried it might produce too much drag, but you never know. Has anyone tried this sort of thing before? 
That’s kind of what I had in mind. Make them perhaps a little larger, but not much, than a MVG, say 2-inches(?) and line them up. Use as many as it takes to get the drive you need. Given their ability to avoid drag, maybe… I could see throwing conventional fin placement out the door. Run them all the way to the tail block. No need for side bites. I could also see spinning hopelessly out of control in a major face plant in front of god and everyone.
Nice to see some openmindedness, particularly with in-line fins. I can give you some feedback from first hand experience with modern shortboards. To allow a single to turn better we all moved the fin forward, usually to the point where it spins out. Learning from thrusters that a smaller rear fin can stabilise, I added a rear fin. It was a little stiff, as I expected, but worked well with no obvious side effects, no tracking etc. It loved down-the-line but needed work to make it more manouvrable in shorter, punchier waves. So then the fine tuning began, reducing, reshaping and repositioning. In the end I use a forward fin approximately 6" in depth and about the same length rake (leading edge to tip) and a base of about 4". The tail fin ended up pretty small, about 3" with a base less than 2". This set-up worked in all size waves but needed the adjustment of a box to suit conditions. The position of the front fin generally ended up a little further forward than the thruster front fins, the rear fin was then moved around constantly to suit conditions. Board design became another adjustment. Generally wide point back for smaller boards and waves, around centre for bigger. I also narrowed the tail a little but thickened it up a bit. I have never felt more smooth control of power and speed in any other set-up, and it seemed to have unlimited top speed. The actual board and fin design would take a lot longer to explain, but I don’t think three or more fins in-line would work, particularly if they are large. Too much base between the leading edge of the entry fin to the trailing edge of the rear fin. I hope more people out there try new stuff on high performance boards, all boards actually, the standard thruster development is boring me to death.
i believe i saw CJ Hobgood with a set of supercharges in an ad of a surf mag a couple months ago… SURFING magazine, November 2003 issue, page 29. Are these them? Also,everybody, what about this: take a patch of fiberglass cloth, something the size of a fin panel maybe, and fold it in half. attach that to the base of a board. could be pretty flimsy but you could change thickness, shape, size etc. by adding these panels and altering them once you can take a razor to them. could be great for something like a small keel fin. not sure if this has been done or not. just another idea…
…I will hunt that mag down.The sponsored pros,due to contracts aren’t allowed to indorse my SCs,but some sponsors will let them use them for free surfing…funny they would show up in an ad.Of course they could be a C-5 built by ? Future or Lokbox or fcs. …I’ll see if one of my surf junkie friends have a copy of that particular mag to view,and get back with you.Herb
Hobgood rides for Rusty. Rusty pushes the C5s. Are you SURE it was SCs and not the C5s?
The guys at True North Surfboards are using a bi-fin which is essentially two single fins in series. Check it out, Rob Olliges http://www.truenorthsurf.com/BiFin.html 
There’s a pic in the Vol5 #4 Surfer’s Journal with that same idea. I posted a pic from the mag sometime ago but I can’t find the shot (Herb knows what I’m talking about). I belive the designer (Bill Fury) has passed on since but if I remember correcly they were made by Fins Unlimited and fit in the longboard center fin box. Side note: That edition is awesome with Recollections of Butch (awesome) and the shot of Renny holding a new Spoon, Group Show - photography focus and the Flung but not Forgotton lams of the past.
…Bill Fury is much alive and I still talk regularly with him on design concepts.He is now recovering from a L.hemi CVA he received a few years ago but is very much in the ballgame.A couple buddies of Bill’s and myself are trying to strongly Encourage Bill to write a book on his life experiences.A book worth reading forsure(no pun intended).Herb …ps Bill was doing the fin drafting thing back in the early-early 70s.Long before anyone else.
…For several years(a few years back)I was hooked-up w/ a few of Rusty’s favorite rider(including several other famous/imfamous surfers).I gave and sold them several Superchargers,and ALL prefered my Superchargers over the C-5 carnards.So much so that they even got Rusty to close in the gap btwn fin and canard,but were unable to change the size or templates of the obsolete C-5 carnards.This all occured awhile back just before all the Rusty team changes??? …Blakestak if you have a copy of that Nov. Surfing mag. I can tell you in a second if there mine or his.And yes they could very well be mine after many thoundsands of sets made by my own hands only.Herb
“C5” was the first thing to cross my mind, but after taking a closer look, I wasnt sure, so who better to ask? could be the FCS C-5 though… Havent seen many superchargers in mags, thats all… the fins were removable, because they werent in the board, just the plugs were they should be could be seen. Also, the photo was for a bodyglove ad, and showed CJ in the air, reveiling the bottom of his board. only curious… or maybe only blind… maybe its time for glasses
…C-5/ FCS /empty plug:Just like in ,“Where’s Wardo ?” more empty C-5 FCS plugs, a protest in design? or…(photoshop work)…Herb
Few days late, but I did see a Sydney based designer for Jeff McCoy, named Victor Ford, who did exactly what you are talking about in 1976 or 77. I didn’t understand how it was going to work back then, but I can imagine it would add feel to the slight numbness I get from standard singles.(go for it whoever you are that’s doing them!) In the same year, a mate of mine who worked for him, did a 3 fin set up with three 4 1/4" ‘mini’ fins of equal size with the front fins at 10 1/2" and the leading edge of the back fin, level with the back edges of the front fins. Did go well but only if he had put a box in the tail (I vaguely remember suggesting this). So close to todays thruster. Can’t imagine how many ideas get nowhere. I am working on this issue with a big fin maker, and maybe soon, there will be a change to this dead-end to so many great design ideas. GW