- Description of contents
‘A’ Class Championship at Gosport T had been intended that this Regatta should begin on Sunday 3rd and finish on Sunday, 10th August, out unfortunately entries fell far short of what had Entries in previous years had been expected. been:—1954 at Gosport 32, 1955 at Fleetwood 40, 1956 at Gosport 28, 1957 at Fleetwood 34. This year, in spite of the fact that for the first time instead of being limited to three boats per club, clubs were permitted to enter an unlimited number of boats, the total entry was only 22 yachts. These consisted of 19 English boats, two Belgian, and one The English fleet included six Gosport French. yachts, four Portsmouth, four Y.M.6-m.O.A., two Fleetwood, and one each from Poole, Hove and Brighton, and Birkenhead. Whereas winds were so strong at Fleetwood during the 1957 event that except for about one short spell, boats sailed continuously in 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th suits, this year at Gosport winds were never strong enough to prevent yachts carrying their full canvas. The one feature common to the 1957 and 1958 Regattas was the amount of rain. ENTRIES YACHT Heading the picture very shows creditable “novice” boat, Susan Wise, leading from Highlander. Below, placer, Serenade, second well ahead of Scheherezade. Opposite page, top, Highlander and Susan Wise at the beginning of their run. Centre, Celeste, winner of the handicap race, and Moonraker I. Bottom, Belgian entry Pallieter and Evros. AND SCORE SHEET FOR BRITISH A-CLASS OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP CLUB OWNER DESIGNER |MON. | TUES.| WED. |THURS| Total | Pos. Turner … | 27 Gosport R. A. Jurd Nordlys 26 Priest… R. Gardner … | Gosport Serenade 29 Turner … .. |Gosport L. Davis Firecrest 19 … Turner Gosport | … West A. P. | Moonraker II 21 Daniels … Gosport D. Pinsent Trixie ll 19 Alexander Fieetwood Fish J. N. | . Rapture 23 Birkenhead… | Priest… B. H. Priest Highlander 18 … Daniels | Y.M.6-m.O.A…. Levison A. | … ill… 17 . |Owner … Gosport Susan Wise | C. Tulip 23 22 20 8 17 18 15 18 13 18 20 21 22 13 16 9 12 18 94 | 77 76 8 75 5 67 18 66 15 66 13 18 15 i 65 63 59 9 17 Van Horebeke | Belgium Pallieter 7 12 L.K,Corrooin | Fleetwood Tango 10 i 13 8 … Turner . | Portsmouth .. | F. Ford Evros 8 9 8 10 Turner … . . | Portsmouth Scheherezade | M. Gowdy 3 7 5 I … Owner | … Vilenspiegel | A. Willems … | Belgium 2 6 9 8 Cc. M. Smith… | ¥.M.6-m.O.A…. | Owner … Senga 4 0 4 7 … Turner Portsmouth L. Mitchell Antic British Open “A’-Class Championship 38 35 26 25 15 Miss Grisbi Moonraker Janet Orchid Marion Too Celeste H. Boussy F. Hemsley … K. Dight V.Crean…. F. Shackleton W. E. Baker… … … … … … … Owner … Tucker … … | Owner France … | Hove& Brighton | Turner Y.M.6-m.O.A…. | Daniels … | Turner | Poole… | Y.M.6-m.O.A…. | Daniels Turner | Portsmouth 21 22 13 17 19 22 12 3 17 18 9 10 8 7 16 18 14 8 16 9 56 54 53 53 50 49 42 153 | 41% 7 I 9 10 6 8 u 2 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 il 12 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Monday The Regatta was opened by the Mayor of Gosport, who started the first pair of boats on their run to leeward. There was a moderate W.S.W. wind, giving almost a reach. Sailing was under the charge of Mr. C. R. Seabrooke as O.0.D., with Mr. S. Frost as Assistant O.0.D. During the afternoon the wind freshened slightly and backed a little. About the middle of the afternoon, Moonraker was dropped and the skeg damaged. This put her out of the running for the rest of the day, and her weather board against Trixie IJ and her heat against Orchid were postponed to enable her to be repaired. She resumed sailing the following day. During the day the whole fleet (except Moonraker) sailed seven heats, At this point Firecrest, sailing admirably, led the fleet with 29 points, closely hunted by Nordlys 27, and Serenade 26. 488 OCTOBER, Tuesday 1958 W ednesday Sailing in two divisions continued. For spectators weather conditions were very pleasant, but decidedly At this point the fleet went into two divisions, one sailing in the forenoon and the other in the afternoon. It poured all day without ceasing, and the wind was light off the Southern bank, giving tricky reaching conditions. These called for most skilful handling, and set a premium on local knowledge. Under these conditions the three leading boats, Firecrest, Nordlys, and Serenade, all Gosport yachts, more than maintained the lead they gained on Monday. Moonraker II had a somewhat disastrous day as she only notched eight points, which undoubtedly prevented her having a chance to be higher than 4th, although she proved top scorer on the last two days of the race. trying for skippers as reaching conditions continued, with the wind even lighter and trickier than on the previous day. By evening 17 heats had been completed, leaving only four heats to be sailed on the final day. As the scores were now Firecrest 70, Nordlys 68, Serenade 68, with their nearest rivals Rapture 53, and Trixie II 51, it was evident that there was every likelihood these three boats would fill: the first three places. Moonraker II with the day’s top score of 22 had greatly improved her position, but was not within striking distance of the leaders. Racing terminated rather early to allow for the Mayor’s Dinner. This was held at the Lee-on-Solent Of the last four heats, one was sailed in the forenoon and the remainder after lunch. The wind was decidedly light, but straight down the lake. It gradually became lighter and finally it fell dead calm for a short period. The wind sprang up again in the afternoon and the rain started. About four o’clock, it swung to the W.N.W. giving a broad reach, and rain continued until the end of the race. The ‘three leading boats all had a bad day, and all lost points to boats with low scores. The real crux, however, was the heat between Firecrest and Serenade, when the latter took the five points. This pulled Firecrest down to 3rd position. Moonraker II had a good day and only dropped two points. This gave her 4th prize with 67 points, just ahead of Trixie IJ and Rapture which each scored 66. Friday To fill in what would otherwise have been a blank day, a Handicap Race was arranged. Handicaps were based on the percentage of points each competitor had lost of the possible 105 during the Championship. Fourteen entered, and the race was won by Celeste. International Race for the Y.M. Cup Saturday The contestants were Pallieter (Belgium), Miss Grisbi (France) and Nordlys (England). There was a light wind right down the lake. Miss Grishi is a new boat, and her skipper does not seem to have got her tuned up for windward work yet, but she showed great speed down wind, and repeatedly beat Nordlys on the run. Nevertheless the fastest run was made by Nordlys which thus gained the ‘“Wingand-Wing” Cup. Final scores were:—England 44, France 33, Belgium 5. Fastest run, 2 min. 19.4. After racing finished, Cups and Prizes were presetae by Mrs. Wade, wife of the President of the ; Of * boats that failed * to * get into the prize list, mention must be made of Susan Wise, Her owner is a recruit to the sport, and this is the first boat he has owned. Moreover, he designed and built her himself, and made an excellent job. He is to be conpee on his boat and on the way he handled er. It is also noteworthy that alf four prizewinners were Gosport boats. There were six entries in all from this club, and they finished Ist, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Sth, and 9th. This is a remarkable record, even allowing for tricky sailing conditions which put a premium on local knowledge. 489 Mi = Tower, and followed by a dance. Thursday MODEL MAKER RADIO CONTROL FOR —the YACHTS successful way By N. F. ARMSTRONG Our article “Radio Control for Yachts the Easy Way” in the March issue provoked (as was intended) some of the practical R/C yachtsmen into correspondence. In May, Jack Gascoigne’s reed systems for sheet and helm control were published, and we are now pleased to print a very sound and well-tried method of sailing a yacht by the “other method’, i.e., automatic sheeting and R/C rudder. EING first and foremost a radio-controller, I often had the desire to control a model yacht. Yacht building not being one of my accomplishments, unfortunately, I was delighted one day to see a beautiful second-hand Braine type Marblehead in the local model shop. I soon became the owner and, after free sailing it to find its ways, I set to work on the radio control gear. The hull is fairly tubby by modern standards and has rather more freeboard than most. Both of these are good points for a radio control as they make for a quick turning and a dry boat; they also allow a margin for over-loading with The inter-gear varied with the passage of time and embraced combinations of escapements, tuned reeds and the little-known see-saw type relay which works on the single or double mark system. After four years of this kind of work, I had learned practically everything except how to control a yacht successfully! gear. All my first efforts were on the lines of control of sheets and rudder with the aid of a winch and of a 4BA screwed rod and nut driving a tiller, respectively. The radio link consisted of a free running, cross-coupled transmitter and a super-regenerative receiver. CONTACT ASSEMBLY CLAMPED TO SPINDLE @_ SHEETLEVER a MOVABLE CLAMP TO WHICH 9 VOLTS soinpLey CONTACTS = A © g= JY 3 MOTOR € PUSHER PIVOT ARM NK 2 CONNECTING ROD WITH DOG~__ = SS LEG BEND SSS oN = except for Winches cause tangles and are useless. 3. Sheeting in against wind pressure requires much more power than can be provided without almost sinking a Marblehead with accumulators. 4. To take care of the puffy, variable winds experienced on most ponds and also in the interests of quick manoeuvring, it is necessary to be able to sheet in and out rapidly. 5. Even with the aid of a masthead pennant, it is often impossible to gauge the wind direction on the yacht, especially when it is some distance away. requires 9. Radio interference must not be transmitted to other boats on the water. With these and other less important points in mind, the subject was attacked afresh. For some time I had been developing a crystal-controlled transmitter and a superheter- INSULATED 7 useless 8. A free-running transmitter (so-called “Simple” Tx.) varies in frequency a lot in use. REDUCTION CONTACT-* CONTACT PUSHER 2. are 7. A super-regenerative receiver constant attention at the lakeside. ARE FIXED 5 1. Escapements gimmicks. 6. It must be possible to move the rudder quickly to any position where it must stay. aA +! FORE & MAIN SHEETS fig! or I sat down and tabulated some of the hard lessons that I had learned as follows:— CRANK 496 1958 OCTOBER, odyne receiver. One or two of my friends in the I.R.C.M.S. were doing the same thing for power boat control. Eventually, we came to the conclusion that crystal control of both transmitter and receiver is necessary fcr trouble- free operation. We have had this type of radio link in service for three years now and radio trouble is virtually a thing of the past. At the same time, we enjoy sailing six to eight boats at the same time. This is an essential feature when it comes to yacht racing. On the subject of sheeting, it was obvious that the sail setting would always be the same for any given wind direction as measured from the fore and aft line of the hull. This being so, it seemed that it should be possible to make the wind itself set the sails. Eventually, the scheme here presented emerged. Basically, it consists of a vane-operated follow-up servo mechanism. Referring to fig. 1, the vane is mounted on a pivot which has its bearings at deck level and which is formed into a suitably sized crank below deck. A connecting rod couples this crank to an insulated contact pusher, which is swivel- mounted on_ the spindle. The contacts (one pair each side of the contact pusher) are rigidly mounted on the spindle, which also carries the sheet lever. The contacts are normally just open. A movement of the vane will be communicated via crank and connecting rod to the contact-pusher which will close one pair of contacts and start up the motor. If the battery is connected the right way round, the motor will turn the spindle together with its contact assembly and sheet lever in the same direction as the contactpusher is pressing, thus tending to open the contacts and stop the motor. As soon as the vane has reached a downwind position, the contact-pusher will come to rest. The motor will turn the spindle slightly further until the contacts open, when the motor will stop. The sheet lever will now have set the sails to the correct position for that particular wind. If Picture opposite, CONTACT PUSHER seey z Sf WLLL 94) \ > CONNECTING ROD somes Ze IN INSULATION VANE MOTOR =——~ 9 VOLTS Fis, 2 the vane makes the contact-pusher press in the opposite direction, of course the reverse movement takes place. As will be seen in the electrical circuit of this unit (fig. 2), one side of the motor is connected to the centre tap of a 9-volt grid bias SHEETING ARRANGEMENTS battery. The other side of the motor goes to the contacts mentioned above which can connect it to either end of the battery. The gear reduction from motor armature to spindle is in the-region of 1,000/1 and must terminate in a worm gear. The maximum rotational’ movement of the spindle with its sheet lever, etc., is influenced by the amount of top, shows model completing a sweeping turn; at right, 1. components can SPINDLE CONTACTS be seen 497 MODEL MAKER Left is the rudder control circuit. Next month’s articl2 ene : ce will give circuit diagrams for at’s Aj ss ‘ L__i( Rv arevour a oe noe : S *S 4 50ut ‘t] the five-valve superheterodynz receiver and the three-valve crystal-controlled transmitter __—=*RY?|_| space available inside the ‘_ it is about a quarter of ie} hull. In my own yacht, a turn, This amount of movement must be taken ‘| into consideration when designing the ratio of the radius of the vane crank to the radius of the contact-pusher pivot arm. The length of the arc through which the contact-pusher moves is equal to twice the radius of the vane crank. In order to prevent damage if the vane is turned right round suddenly, it is wise to make the connecting rod of 16 s.w.g. mild or silver steel and to form it into a dogleg shape. This then acts as a spring and absorbs the shock. The main and fore sheets are attached to the sheet arm at the same place. They emerge through the deck close to the base of the mast as in fig. 3. The fore sheet is taken through a deck eyelet, on through a block on the foresail boom and is bent to a second eyelet on the deck. The main sheet is taken straight to a block on the mainsail boom and thence to its anchoring point on the centre line of the hull. The position of the block on the main boom is selected to give the correct amount of boom travel. The closer it is to the mast, the greater will be the travel. Like most things, this system is not perfect, There doesn’t seem to be much radio control about this thing so far, but here it comes! It will be realised that this system of sail control, if used on a free-sailing yacht, would work completely at random. It is brought to heel simply by steering the yacht in the desired direction. This being so, it is only necessary to control the rudder by radio, while the sails are controlled indirectly. The familiar mark/space method is used. As only port and starboard are required besides neutral, it is arranged so that neither the speed nor the ratio of the mark/space matter. Mark/ space will hold the rudder steady, while a full mark will turn it to port and a full space, to starboard. The electrical circuit is shown in fig. 4 in its switched off position. Now consider that a mark/space signal is received. The receiver relay, RxRy will distribute current from the 9-volt battery alternately to relays Ry2 and Ry3. Both these relays will pull in steadily as they have delay condensers. This will be the normal state when sailing. It will be seen that the reeds of Ry2 and Ry3 contact “C” and “E”. This connects both poles of the rudder motor to the negative terminal of the 41-volt battery and therefore, the motor is at rest. Now, if the mark-space is changed to a full mark, RxRy pulls in to contact “B” steadily. Ry3 remains pulled in, but Ry2 drops out and makes contact “D”. It will be seen that the rudder motor is now connected across the battery and it starts up. Change the full mark to a full space. RxRy drops out to contact “A” steadily, Ry2 pulls in to contact “C” while Ry3 drops out to contact “F”. The rudder motor is now reversed. It will be but its shortcomings are not great. The main brought to rest by a resumption of mark/space. drawback is the small amount of backlash Ry2 and Ry3 may be any type or relay which allowed in the movement of the contact-pusher is capable of being delayed for + second. It between the contacts. This backlash is there is necessary to insert limit switches to limit to prevent vane flutter from continually operatthe rudder movement. Their actual posi“ing the motor backwards and forwards which -tion in the boat is on the deck just in would result in more quickly discharged bat- front of the vane as can be seen in the photos. teries. It also prevents the sails from being Fresh water has little or no effect on them. close-hauled quite so tightly as one would like. In order to avert that lakeside tragedy of However, it is a small matter and it allows the the intergear battery that is as flat as the battery to last about 24 hours of sailing time. proverbial pancake, owing to having been left It is interesting to note that, with this system, plugged in since last week, it is wise to have it requires more power to let out sail than it an intergear master switch. A six-pole, twodoes to haul in. As the yacht must be headed way switch will handle up to six circuits. more into wind in order to take in sail, it will (To be concluded) be obvious that the sheets will be slack while PLASTICS TODAY the hauling is done. For this reason very little Messrs. Gamage’s Model Department point out that in our reference to their new model catalogue power is required, but, as before mentioned, the final gear, that is the one on the spindle, must be a worm in order to prevent the sails from pulling the sheet lever around. 498 in our article “Plastics Today” in last month’s MODEL MAKER we were guilty of understatement in attributing a mere twelve pages to plastics therein — there will, in fact, be double this number of pages on the subject. OCT o-Bie rR: ( I UCKER’S TOPICAL TALKS 4 = BOWDEN slightly (i.e., usually somewhere between 4 and 7+ p.c.) abaft the midsection. Its exact position is governed by the position of the G.B.D. and the angle of rake given to the Raked Midsection. If Col. Bowden will condescend to look at any =) AND BALANCE : N his recent article on “Hull Balance in Model and Full-scale Yachts”, Lt.-Col. C. E. Bowden suggests the subject is one for “controversial discussion,’ and during the Gosport A-Class Regatta, several knowledgeable model yachtsmen asked me to expose the fallacies of his ideas. According to the Colonel, there is a_ difference between the balance of a model and the balance of a full-size yacht because the “average model” has her “Max. Beam amidships,” while the “average fullscale modern yacht” has her “Max. Beam slightly aft of amidships.” By “average full-scale modern yacht” he evidently means a vessel of the displacement type, though he omits to specify this. Now it is perfectly true that a well-designed yacht of the displacement type has her Max. Beam slightly abaft the midsection, but unfortunately the Colonel illustrates this in Fig. 1 B by a drawing of a yacht with her Max. Beam point about 15 per cent. of L.W.L. length abaft it! When a yacht proves a hard-mouthed brute with a tendency to bury her nose and lift her tail on heeling, her lines almost invariably reveal that the Max. Beam is too far aft, and in consequenee the fore-body is too lean and the after-body too coarse. The correct position for the Max. Beam point falls somewhere between 5 and 74 per cent. L.W.L. length abaft the midsection. Incidentally, as will be shown later, this is exactly the same as for a model yacht. However, I trust no misguided person will build a yacht according to the Colonel’s interpretation of “slightly aft of amidships,” or he will find himself saddled with a wet and unhandy horror of a boat! In dealing with models our expert friertd is even more adrift, since he apparently has not the vaguest knowledge of where their Max. Beam point is usually placed. Except for an occasional freak produced by some beginner or experimenter, all model yachts (or at least 95 out of every 100) have raked midship sections. In these the G.B.D. (Greatest Body Depth) of the canoe body falls on the midsection or slightly (i.c., not much more than about 24 p.e. L.W.L. length) ahead of it. The Max. Beam point is placed —— DOWN WITH RAIL ! Dear Sir, I abhor the precedence you are giving to Electric Rail Car Racing, when it is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence that this no more resembles the real thing than the annual farce the Americans hold at Indianapolis. To anybody who has ever seen any car racing (and it’s obvious these rail-car types have not) it should be apparent that the only possible way to go about Electric Car Racing is to pick-up from a slot. Also, there should only be one point of contact with the track, apart from the wheels, i.e., the wiper-cum-steering-pin. Another point—haven’t any of these rail-car types noticed that cars just don’t go round on equidistant ‘‘Grooves”? Has anyone seen the way they tuck in behind each other on the corners? Just try doing this with a Pygmalion great rail sticking up in the way. (It’s easy with a slot!) And lastly, as a matter of interest, what are the lengths of these big tracks? Ours 1958 of the three editions of “Model Sailing Craft” (written by W. J. Daniels and myself in collaboration, and first published in 1932), he will find an elementary explanation of the methods of design used by Mr. Daniels. This is illustrated by four folding plates, one showing “The First Steps of the Design.” On this the ‘Raking Midsection” is plainly marked. May I ask the Colonel to examine this design, or in fact any of the designs which are included in the various edition of this book, and he will then observe that owing to the placing of the G.B.D. and Max. Beam points, the models have forward sections that are narrower, deeper and sharper than the after ones. Conversely, the after sections are fuller and beamier (and when the G.B.D. is forward of midships, also shallower) than the forward ones. All these boats are normal models. In other words, there is No difference in the placing of the Max. Beam points on models and full-scale craft. Moreover, models do Not have their forward and after sections almost similar, but the same type of difference exists as that between the forward and after sections in a full-scale yacht of the displacement type. Now, theories are suitable subjects for “controversial discussion,” but incontrovertible facts have to be accepted as such. Thus the Colonel’s flights of fancy fall to the ground, since he bases his notions on erroneous premises. Q.E.D. My only regret is that he has wasted his own and my time, as well as that of readers. However, I hope he has enjoyed his argument with himself ! When I referred to experimental craft which have midsections without rake, and consequently more or less similar sections in the fore-body and afterbody, I was reminded of Guy Blogg’s circular arc theories. While reading a work by Alan Villiers recently, I found a picture of a vessel with perfectly round sections. It was explained that this hull is favoured by Norwegian Sealers because it minimises the danger of being crushed by icefloes! know some model yachtsmen are very hardy about winter sailing, but would not have suspected my friend, Guy Blogg, of carrying matters to such lengths! Oe will be four lanes of 76 ft. approx. } mile in 1/40 scale, when it is finished. C. HUTCHINSON. Eastcote, Ruislip, Middlesex. PARDON OUR MAGNETIC Dear Sir, SLIP . _ The article describing the mechanical details for a motor drive for ““Match-box Miniatures” in the August MODEL MAKER I found very interesting. I would, however, draw your attention to the description of the manufacture of the small permanent magnet for the drive motor. Soft iron is not a suitable material for permanent magnets, and in the past I have found difficulty in obtaining satisfactory results even from heat-treated ‘“thard” steels (e.g., silver steel). Further, it is not immediately clear from the article in what direction the ring should be magnetised. I suggest it would be difficult to obtain the desired field using a normal magnetiser. This, however, could be done using the arrangement shown. é Despite these comments the article was 515 extremely interesting and shows considerable ingenuity on the part of Mr. Parsley. Rudder control on radio controlled ships is just one extension of his idea on magnetic steering. My thanks for this excellent article and the many others you publish, which enable € man with little workshop facilities to obtain very pleasing results. A. J. F. GASKING. North Watford. (Two other readers wrote re soft iron. We took a lot of convincing. Sorry !—Ep.)
