Model Yachting News: Issue 24 – March 1986

Editor: Chris Jackson 33 Yorke Gardens England Mode I Yachting 2 Reigate RH2 9HQ News Tel: : (0 (07372) 49365 MARCH 1986 I am grateful to Graham Bantock for the extensive article he has prepared for this issue. It has covered a period when I have had other things to do and provided readers with a change of style which is always interesting. Much of the rest Of this issue covers the inevitable winter meetings of which precedes a very busy European season ahead. IMYRU and MYA Good sailing! ERRAT. We-make mistakes, some stood was a drawing of small and some big! Last issue we put the well-known Walicki M boat. another design heavily influenced by the original. and to all who been published, have been misled. I plan which we Unfortunately it wasn’t! under Just My apologies to Janusz Walicki, understand the but the designer does build a in a lines of the original have never few copies each year. COVER PIC. The old and the new. OBERON, nearest camera, attended 6 metre vane nationals. has a long history, owned by Bill Green, sails NEMESIS at last year’s well Current owner of Oberon is John Best, having been built in the 1950s. who is also a photographer. Nemesis is but the boat a Bantock design Thanks Bill! NOTICE The Data Protection Register 1984. was established on llth November 1985, To comply with this law I am advising all readers that it list their names and addresses on a personal computer file. under an Act of is my intention to Payment of new sub- scriptions after March 1986 will be taken as acceptance by the individual of my right to access this relevant information. COPY DATES Please note that MYN goes to the printers on the first day of the month of issue and copy should reach me 3/4 weeks beforehand if at all possible. Subscriptions from JUNE 1986 cover 7 issues up to DECEMBER 1987, result the subscription rate is: inclusive. As a post paid U.K. post paid EUROPE post paid ALL OTHER COUNTRIES This will move the renewal date in future to a winter one and allow more time to sort the paperwork out. Some previous year’s copies (numbers 21-24) are available in sets at £4 per set. Make cheques or Giro or money orders payable to Model Yachting News. OVERSEAS SUBSCRIBERS. Please remit this is impossible add 25% extra cheques drawn on a bank with a LONDON branch. If for bank charges. Please note that the editor produces this magazine as a spare time occupation. Telephone calls to talk about model yachts are always welcome, but I am only at home tn the evenings and weekende. (Except when sailing!) News In Brier NAVIGA WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS Final details for the Naviga event this year, classes will be run, ion looks very high at encourage MORE 10 RATER, high EUROPEAN 10 RATERS. Three Unfortunately cost of a¢ccommodat10 dollars rent, which will REGATTAS A proposed event known. VANE M CLASS. Reims, At for vane boats. in the Paris area, organised by L’US Creteil, on either (according to my English diary a Friday and Saturday!) France over the weekend 17th/19th May, More details from Thierry Bayard, 3 an international Square Bolivar, 75019, event Paris, Lahure. The German D.S.V. Kandel, have a series of Frankfurt and Munchen during We not entry. More details when RM. X CLASS and M CLASS. 30 dollars per day rer person + 19/20th or 26/27th September Michel Moscow from 14th to 22nd August. have full details Antwerp 10-11 of five races over weekends French Berlin, 1986. RM regattas on the May Amsterdam 14-15 June All in Hamburg, or continent at :- Wolfgangsee 3-11 Champex 3-9 August (Switz) May IMYRU races. Anyone wanting to enter or visit whilst for details. on holiday please send S.A.E. SRRS NR I have decided that it is necessary to move the renewal date of M.Y.N. to the winter period. Increased circulation has meant more confusion as to the reason for the original June date, and the move will also allow the extra bookwork to be done from sailing. I hope existing by subscribing for the odd number of SUBSCRIPTION RATES in the winter break readers will understand the reasons for this and assist seven issues JUNE 86 to DECEMBER 87. £12 post paid U.K. £14 post paid EUROPE £16 post paid ALL OTHER COUNTRIES Remember one payment covers nearly two years’ issues!! OVERSEAS SUBSCRIBERS. I have been having drawn on a bank with a London branch. increased charges for handling cheques not Your help in avoiding this problem would be appreciated as money lost in this way is totally wasted. If you can’t find a local bank with a LONDON branch please add 25% to meet these charges. Please return this slip CO nee reece ene creweseccsces eect eeseceeeccescccecs with your name and address Model Yachting 33 Yorke Gardens News Reigate RH2 9HQ England Tel: (07372) 49365 CeCe Comme eee eres eeserereeseseneeeesesesessesesses Seip « Sere tele sieiisiatsig’s oieeele’e’s ols sie sett S’s clsrele wisielevels elgie’c If you have already patd you are covered to the end of 1986 only. To extend through 1987 please send a cheque for 50% of the above. jimyRU> INTERNATIONAL NODEL YACHT RACING UNION mmyru The Permanent Committee met in London on 11th January. The only absentee was Roger Courtney (S. Africa), who had been unable to obtain travel sponsorship. At the request of the Deutscher Segler Verband (DSV), their representative, Horst Kronke, attended specifically to discuss the proposals for a joint IMYRU/ NAVIGA World Championship in Berlin in 1988. FUTURE POLICY Before formally opening the meeting at 10.45 a.m., the Chairman emphasized that the Committee would have to make important decisions about several matters on the agenda and it had been suggested to him that, before proceeding further, the Committee should agree about a future policy. He therefore invited Jan Dejmo (Sweden) to present his recommendations. He made three points for consideration by the Committee:- (1) IMYRU lacks the necessary finance to produce its own rules and regulations relating to racing and measurement. It should therefore take advantage of what is already available from IYRU – material that has been published as a result of much experience and work over a very long period. It would cost comparatively little to do this and he pointed out that a very satisfactory start had already been made by adopting the IYRU Racing Rules and the RC Appendix. (2) The next step would be to urge all IMYRU National Authorities to affiliate to their full-size authorities, as is already the case with England (RYA), France (FFV), Germany (DSV), Holland (KNWV) and Italy (FIV). Sweden seems set to follow this lead and Norway, too, with the help of an influential approach to the NYA. (3) The ultimate aim would be for the IMYRU to become part of the administration of IYRU but, to achieve this, it would be necessary for the majority of the membership to conform with (2) above. When put to a vote, the Committee agreed to adopt these recommendations as the Union’s future policy. FINANCE The Treasurer reported that 22 countries had paid their 1985 subscriptions, leaving Argentina the only exception. After paying Committee members’ travelling expenses to attend the meeting, amounting to over £500, the Union’s funds would be seriously depleted and it would be impossible to pay those expenses again in future without a substantial increase in subscriptions. The membership had two choices:- (1) To revert to an all-English Committee and officials and pay no expenses or (2) To continue international representation and pay the expenses of up to four international members. Assuming these would be from Europe, it would require an increase in income of around £600. The Committee felt that, if this is what the membership requires, then it must be prepared to pay for it and the fairest way would be to increase the boat levy from 10p to 30p per boat which, boats, with a total declared world fleet would produce an additional income of £780. This will of approximately 3900 go forward as a motion for the General Meeting at Fleetwood in July. M CLASS RULES REVISION The Rating Rules Officer, Jan Dejmo, said that he would be sending a letter to all National Authorities before ist April, inviting further questions to include Questionnaire which he would prepare in time for the General Meeting, in a so that competitors in the World Championship would have the opportunity to discuss it during the week. Work on the revision of the 10 Rater and EC12m class rules will not commence until completion of the Marblehead rules revision. A motion to change the title of the Rating Rules Committee to Technical Committee will require formal ratification by the General Meeting. cont’d “ : om ® e =| d 3>o 3 ® a a5 % > 2 ©fa 5 ; gq‘ 5 A oO eo : ‘ a bp | ad 0 5 QO 89 5 =m Oa8®iol IMYRU_REGULATIONS Draft Regulations were presented by Jan Dejmo, together with a recommended Order of International Class Measurement Rules, both drafts being based on the IYRU versions. The former would be presented to the General Meeting for agreement but the latter would be held in abeyance until such time as it was felt it might be put into effect. R.C. YACHT RACING SYSTEM A lengthy discussion on whether to adopt one racing system or to permit a choice of several systems for international events, resulted in a decision to use one system. There then followed a further lengthy discussion, which at times became quite heated, about which system to adopt and, in particular, which system should be used in the forthcoming World Championship. There were altogether six possibilities:. (1) The original Swedish system used satisfactorily at the 1983 ERMC. (2) The MYA alternative ‘a’. (3) The MYA alternative ‘b’. (4) The French “Grill Hazard” (random selection into heats. ) (5) A combination of a complete schedule and Grill Hazard, followed by MYA alternative ‘b’ as proposed by the Fleetwood Organising Committee. (6) The original Swedish system amended by:a) Increasing the number of boats in each heat to 12. b) Substituting the text of Appendix 4 in the MYA alternative ‘b’. c) Deleting the choice of a ranking round or a tournament round as a method of division into heats and substituting a suitable number of Grill Hazard races. (a) Adopting the alternative ‘b’ method of dealing with the problem of a reduction in the number of boats in the lowest heat caused by retirements, except that four or less boats would be preferred rather than five or less before re-arrangement of the heats. When put to the vote, option 6 was chosen, after the Chairman’s casting vote, not only as the official system but also for use in the World Championship, when there would be two days of Grill Hazard racing followed by the revised original RCYRS. Torvald Klem accepted the task of producing a finished text as soon as possible. WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS (a) RM 1986 – Fleetwood Having dealt with the Racing System to be used in this event, the Committee then turned its attention to the proposed Measurement Instructions. The arguments about the Racing System paled into insignificance compared with what followed and centred mainly around whether sails should be measured off the boat and off the spars and laid flat on a table, as proposed, or off the boat and on the spars, or on the boat. Time was slipping by and as the arguments appeared to be getting nowhere, the Chairman felt that he had no alternative but to intervene and terminate the discussion by ruling that the Organising Committee’s proposals would have to be accepted with an already proposed amendment that sails would be check measured off the boat BUT ON the spars. The Secretary of the Organising Committee, Russell Potts, who had been waiting patiently outside the room, was then invited to join the meeting and the decisions reached were conveyed to him. (b) RM & R10r 1988 – Berlin The Chairman summarised the events and negotiations leading up to a proposed combined IMYRU/NAVIGA World Championship for RM and R10r classes at Gatow, Berlin, in August, 1988, in conjunction with a proposed Model Sports Olympics. It was clear that all interested parties in Germany and NAVIGA were keen to see the event take of NAVIGA, Hans Kukula, had confirmed that NAVIGA will place. The General Secretary have adopted IMYRU Rating and Racing rules by 1987. Horst Kronke was then invited to speak on behalf of DSV. He presented pictures of the venue at Gatow and tourist brochures of Berlin and strongly urged the Committee to sanction the event in the interests of all model yachtsmen. After discussion, it was agreed that IMYRU would accept the proposals subject to:6 SL Ee (1) The formation of a Championship Steering Committee on which there would be at least one representative from IMYRU and two from DSV. $33 A recommendation being made to DSV to the effect that, unless both RM and R10r 2) IMYRU Rating and Racing rules being used in the event. classes could be raced simultaneously at the same venue, the event should be for RM class only, because past experience has shown that competitors travelling long distances expected to be able to enjoy maximum sailing time every day and not to have to spend part of the week watching another class sail. Herr Kronke was thanked for his attendance and for the time and effort he had expended in bringing the preliminary negotiations to a friendly and successful conclusion. (c) R10r 1987 – Sweden Jan Dejmo confirmed that SMSF were willing to host a World Championship for R10rs next year, in fact there was quite a lot of enthusiasm for the event. However, so far, an Organising Committee had not been formed and, until this has been done, no firm application could be made. (d) EC12m 1987 – Queensland An application had been received from the Australian MYA for Queensland to host a World Championship for EC12m class in January, 1987. Confirmation of a suitable venue was still awaited and, until this was received, official sanction could not be given. PERTH, 1987 In spite of reminders, no further news had been received from Western Australia MYA about the proposed event in Perth to coincide with the 1987 America’s Cup Defence. IMYRU DIRECTIVES It was agreed that a set of Dire.tives governing World and Regional Championships, which were drafted following the 1980 World Championship in Ottawa, should be suspended until after the RM World Championship, when they would be reviewed. EUROPEAN RM CHAMPIONSHIP TROPHY An offer from Sweden to present a trophy for European RM Championships was gratefully accepted. A Deed of Gift had been drawn up and the Cup would be presented to Torvald Klem (Norway) as the first winner of the event in 1983. SOUTH AFRICA The meeting considered the recent decision of IYRU to apply Olympic entry conditions to all its international events, which effectively bars South African entries, It was decided that there was little alternative but to take similar action, especially as concern had been expressed about the problems that might arise for the organisers of the RM World Championship at Fleetwood if South African entries were accepted. Also, it was pointed out that the Wyre Bourough Council could be caused great embarrassment if the South Africa Cup was put on display at the prizegiving ceremony. There would be no way of preventing the local press from giving the event and concluding ceremony adverse publicity if they felt so inclined. Another critical factor was that, as soon as South African involvement became known to sponsors, they might withdraw their support, finance. which would leave the organisers without the necessary It was therefore agreed to inform the MYA of South Africa that their entries could not be accepted and that the South Africa Cup would be withdrawn for the foreseeable future. GENERAL MESTING This will be held at the North Euston Hotel, Fleetwood, on Friday, 18th July, from 6 pem. to midnight and a buffet supper will be served. Norman Hatfield, Chairman, Permanent Committee, IMYRU. J CLASS BOAT This class has been around for some years in the U.S.A. and several hundred have been built, but seem to dislike regattas. George Bard built this one recently and has provided the basic details and dimensions. George also owns hull no. 317 and comments that they sail well in light air, with plenty of sail area. Sail area 2478 sq.in (1638 in main) 65° L.0.A. L.Wst. 62” Weight 63 1b. Beam 144″ Ballast 45 lb. point talking Could I take up a few column inches debate about fleet sailing systems. proposed in M.Y. News to begin what In particular, “Alternative A RC Yacht Racing System” competition, within the constraints In particular, naturally end up fundamental truly win race that in lower importance any race he that is competes fleets, that they in the true spirit of fair systems, to simulate a The rarely win ina fact races such competitors real that, is yacht in racing. in which all fleet C cannot “win” a race any competitor can in practice, not should for series of races A competitor whereas in. I find it hard to accept that the controlled can never be fair. scoma winning points total, truly win any radio the scoring system proposed competitors race together, race i.e. ot is I hope could be a useful sailers important. always What who is of see the opportunity to sail. The declared advantage of the system of promoting close competition among the best skippers in fleet A is surely the promotion of a most the normal unwelcome move in elitism which, An informal discussion at a recent Open Fvent where Alternative A was used, seemed to that many the What readers do Perhaps can be your you could “rabbits”, unhappy with the but was being system. expressed by This view was skilled and not confined experienced skippers. think? publish an explanation understood by for is allowed. Skippers were solely among even is a Champion- indicate Open Meeting and I feel, National ships where open entry run of form of those readers who of the have not system, so that sailed under the above objections it. MIKE HOUNSELL * More on this topic elsewhere in this issue (Ed.) [re 32-27] ESTABLISHED SAILMAKERS * YACHTS x MASTS * PLANS * FITTINGS * R/C EQUIPMENT & SAIL WINCHES * BOOKS * NYLET MAIL ORDER CATALOGUE (WORLDWIDE). THE PREMIER SAILMAKERS We are proud of our reputation for fine products; 1986 heralds 40 years of model sailmaking, and further advances in cutting and shaping techniques coupled with improved cloth stability and the use of Hybrid sails with s. suit Mylars. All in all good news for both racing sails and the humbler ‘cruising’ Prices start at around £15 – in addition to our Standard range of sails, we offer ours sails to customers special order, in white or colours, with or without panels (col and panels at extra cost). Finely cut sails for Schooners etc. and for Exhibition and Display a Speciality. @ MARBLEHEAD YACHT ‘cypsy’ Mk2 This highly successful and sleek M-class racing yacht en” in Mk2 form, features new keel with carbon-fibre and ‘wing’ – prices from £94.50 or £138 excluding fittings and radio. We also build yachts to order. Our range of @ boats start with the 36 inch class, easy to build and easy on the pocket. e The Nylet Worldwide Mail Order Catalogue £1 in UK; Eire IRE£2 notes; Abroad 6 postal coupons OR currency notes, $5 USA, Australia and N. Zealand, Canada; Kr 30 Scandinavia, e $40 Hong Kong; S. Africa 20 Rand – only currency notes please, no cheques for catalogu E abroad OR phone with your Access or American Express card. CREDIT CARD HOLDER MAY PHON SDAY THUR ERS CALL ONAL PERS TO OPEN 2. 9 S RDAY SATU , 6.30 9 OPEN ARE S LINE OUR R ORDE FRIDAY, SATURDAY MORNING. Phone for guide in. (Trade enquiries welcome) NYLET LTD., PO Box 7, Fordingbridge, Hants, SP6 1RQ, England. Telephone 0425 53456 VARIATIONS on A THEME PRODUCED BY GRAHAM BANTOCK IN ASSOCIATION WITH CHRIS DICKS & ROGER STOLLERY When the editor asked topic ‘Marblehead Roger Stollery at the two decades the major Common to ability regard a ed of in the both is a elimination because being is of design The slightly typists style daunting the and weak of an and radio. rather the two articles, possibly the development format,of of than to economy have been the last effect on > and appears the otherwise 11 their that they accentuation X time been they to for write (of have two pages questions asked the It persuade nearly process the of success. writers which design designs. of to vane for with They profound to being designs. a key than own to had their list opportunity have the a MYN UK the points, spring the both to the in as with of their fleet, approach concession different seemed reaction, points any points, Hopefully well; of presented less received weak it pages development Marblehead the 16 discuss and methodical identify strong to Marblehead trends Question/Answer their Dicks influence the design. Development’ Chris edge ‘produce! by to required to and, design’s The Hull and leading me which pages and would is this hull to conceiv-— answers on to not due was will consider have the are Marblehead effort) forced pieces 26, be aspects dwelt on. different involved. RM AVAILABILITY UPDATE LOW is a PROFILE now Briefly available boat builder Stone, of Low from around form plug moulds and impreve forward of is have the keel This displacement relative newcomer hulls/kits 7400 Herning, available EASY May to the UK are GO Ken Bbler Lost Love NO SECRET The is about in the Gardens, Ray and for to deck (500 to ‘have new produce are who by by Martin should David Royal contact Stone who is David Displacement 6.4 won modified to of kgs. the A this plan that – wooden 1985 The the the a new intention V shows is sections a weight plans new of fin RM 1000 view the rather altogether of a address out rather GRP Midlands, is is beam at produce a and by GRP Egelgkkevej, Plans also a 0562 hull have approach 9.3″. Vic Ken last similar much by current Bellerson Butler, of is 10 886137. Close, kit Fleetwood lines Contact Briarwood effectively joined. 4O 20 hulls different tel. sailed £8. to hulls. 51 Kroner. attractive waterline the West Danish radio example fittings, price set for Championship Scandinavian and lbs, planked and 110 Bantock, the optimised Danish Sejl go’ supplied experience lines. The Heartbeat a what his achieve reports Contact by 13.5 of grams). Graham production light slightly. Jones Stourbridge, to slightly details – In rounded 1986. plan them Baker’s purchasers and impressed In moulded ability sport Displacement continuing hull 5.8 for decided standards. Leaholme being to development designer, Circus. co-operating He the a the Denmark After Andren’s to Ken 20z is planned from to is control; being recently. made been 11b yacht is designed development of Ashanti which has been used in tacking have around It 23, Intending Jackson Enquiries MYN Weston Super Mare, tel. 0934 415525. lbs. David uses a ‘Deception’ trig. been boat’s now HARLEKIN Barry the wings!). shells by in £30. Cheshire. David Hollom’s modified (no for 61 Forest Drive, Profile is 11.75 ZEPHYR dla) to mentioned Fareham, without lead Hants. or-rig. rromM MARCH HARE ROGER STOLLERY’S MARBLEHEAD DESIGNS TO nee In 1968 Model by Roger Stollery: displacements being fhe tney enabled and which were using an joined the it these was another great 16 extreme of the in time & this yachts mouldings for and along the hailed a MAD were deck’ was of Marbleheads HATTER. Large the Their lightest respect. ‘turtle builder This trio respectively, these provide the RABBIT lbs called tne interdependent concept the line as a deck of and hull maximum major variety which of beam breakthrough hulls emerged years. showed not WHITE and flange. at following so to by integral in and the moulder construction of 18 somewhat of in None 20, published HARE, construction were the Magazine MARCH were considered design i.e. Boats the until step ability 1973 when forward was of the original Roger designed made. Its trend setters RBLOODAXE immediate that championship success combined with well engineered and high quality mouldings ensured commercial success on a scale only exceeded since by RM kits due to the potentially bigger market. BLOODAXE is still in production and as late as 1980 nearly 50% of the vane championship fleet comprised BLOODAXES. Its displacement was average for the time at 16 mouldings were fin During its the and the predecessors builder, but the deck and hull this time the join line the hull moulding also incorporated and the waterline, was along the lbs. Like joined by skeg. mid seventies when RMs became popular enough to warrant staging the first MYA class championship it was not surprising tnat the first fleet included a number of BLOODAXES. Early experience with this design as an RM indicated that the keel area needed to be increased from the original 33 sq.ins. and that a 15″ draught was probably too small to be competitve. Roger started radio This yacht used hull mould was to reduce to be was the seen this on the into By now Roger of simpler that a because design In of was 1980 entirely longer appeared. that hull the lead enabling and really novel the bottom and the his Project appearance and despite to of using A into movement feature at 12 of the the WAKK II. displaced volume. effort to embryonic – development rig incredibly this were it building progressive had complex tailored appealed simplicity, off the swing mouldings same hull to is likely the design features, the sections but an The keel was now no moulded keel encapsulating design. a fin box balance was This in the its the profile, which Austin’s hull yacht. preceded design, Alex 44 pronounced contemporaries. keel top. metre Australia to radius the put separately fit and to although the rudder depth completely and its the virtually backstay some but garboard So 1977. was PICKAXE actually and hull. Acorn the rig many fin narrow of were designed aft and and in fin PICKAXE’s performance than desizned fore swing of the first considerable forestay llowever the the on a of materially Naturally number different was adding although with was rear dedicationg slower of the shrouds, this. part area 1968 design grounds AXIS keel since new was similar the emerged waterline, a rigging, the increase the The standards! on to above PICKAXE lbs. by many moulding the 13 the completion after to strap, for soon displacement kicking 1986 same altered feature faired racing a However, wide similar itself well thus at profile preceded prepared and conventionally Vane He rigged Championships was also designer placed who high been made of lot a of his effort winter was toy a The ease. and Stollery Total sections of box The of It joint mouldings of place has own B moulded with all CF should note is a extent offset a rigging parts total Although failed and of and the had gain in that one foot the AXIS and with gained the carbon of by the simple fittings, the home-made the the 1984 fibre more which of lbs top Championship. and about nature number 13 highly advanced design new the BEE’s concerned cost on relative for in long the fibre he this first carbon Those of the along about the rationalisation deck again Klem spars. and maximum was BUZZ ali of designs DAREDEVIL. the yacht was previous line, 1965 plug of rigs has ‘cheque materials does away most of down to four. Roger to of expenditure little line produced use With several sailing large to on sheer per be new its hull the behind Torvald book’ the the Kevlar the very that the advantage of Roger’s used as to the rigs. his the use with for had real was and A a since arrangement Kevlar first created Marblehead BEE, between that his he with only Whereas one, started Since to but felt enough Extensive 1984 beating BLOODAXE/PICKAXE/AXIS Roger 2nd equipped and Championship. Roger taken planning point creditable then 1983 Championship stage not hulls the European RM this had the new displacement this By recarved. the level. enabled at 1983 design. keel/keel moulds 1983 careful development ‘CHOPPA’ moulded Vane materials. Alex’s completely deck a the employed of tumblehome, tine 1983 won weight. all near ‘Alaxis’ llth. and and beaw in and altered had 8th performance in the the method construction During and finished construction modern AXIS did qualify not for compete the 1985 in the ROC he 1985 can RM be Championship at times a and formidable opponent by virtue of his ability to extract the best from a boat’s rig – swing rig or otherwise – and to detect which modification is required to improve a design’s weak point without sacrificing its all round sailing qualities. Roger’s designs follow a very distinct and progressive line of development each being the obvious relative of its predecessor. 6B GRAHAM: In 1968 the displacement of an average Marblehead was about 20 lbs and a well constructed hull from good quality commercially produced mouldings had a ballast ratio of 70%. Eighteen years later displacement has dropped by one third (2% per . average) but ballast ratio is typically the same. This annumon suggests that the lighter boats of 1985 are a direct result of lighter construction methods only. Has there been any real development ROGER: of design The answer to in those 18 years? this question is definitely yes. I have never thought that ballast ratio is a really important consideration on its own. The question itself shows that you cannot differentiate between the quality of developments at different times by just considering The great are REAL. beauty restricted and is these real ratio. this The about rules allow parameters haven’t because as developments freedom which changed good in to control for boats 50 12 try the odd come Marbleheads to new ideas important years. the The top is that they within speed factors development they are used as the stepping prove then may be a doubt cul-de-sac fun whether it it is used and resistant were required contributory fashion the new the is If these new previous the line superior far the faster mark, development There to ideas bench of required. simpler, with offset design for is no pre-bulb and much offwind over in on are are too in lines The of a one source off on own. the past ‘nutters’ are and the new better! keel keel. beam type. be and rig hull considerations would shape The sea- Location, developments. been stifled 20 years There is too wagon. at much are results: builders fashion Crazy ago Designs the enough current bulb pre-bulb than Look not when narrower years and context hulls? band excellence. There of new powerful Britain designs their jumping different. more as Design special and depth, design all the tin 18 hull ot the last to more the area designing with of wetted less much the lower boats compared the waves, mouldings there added displacement drag any example, because of to excellence for from For bulbs boats progress. advantage benefits lighter quest make failures extra factors The to were lighter the development reason. there the allowed otherwise. hopeless realise have best or skippers GRAHAM: are the not, far yachtsman their continent; If are sole for thinkers off the take were to today: top beating advances model to skippers credited they displacement, Yes; less design. approach machines not hulls reliance ROGER: and of Has our by new initially, to shapes GRAHAM: a ago: the they Less réduction better achieved. construction required by is required were worthy is day even water construction were designs the and years inspires is to sail. but what keels 25 to course, input present of succeed, is on development that designs Of point themselves real more off on ideas and the often spark development. first all Kevlar hulls were used in the 1982 RM Championship – he first all carbon fibre hulls arrived in 1985 (U.K. ) a WithCF spars now becoming commonplace, have we got to the stage where the control future surfaces development and the hull will be confined to the design of shape ? No; I don’t believe design development will be any different ROGER: from any other time; there will be a search for improvement in design of rigs, materials and construction as well as the design of hulls, fins and rudders. There is no doubt the advances in construction recently have been dramatic. Since PICKAXE, your boats have been designed with the GRAHAM: swing rig in mind – does this have any great bearing on the design of the ROGER: A hull? No, reduction are only not not in taken stiffness at all in concept, construction by is the hull: weight it just is doesn’t concentrated in 413 the in the achieved have to mast/fin detail design. as rig be the so area. stiff, forces the GRAHAM: MARCH tumblehome heel HARE,MAI) aft angles. to You producing home how so ROGER: has (BEEK to a well is one a mannered of a fine reducing bow heavy to introduce (13% ° less). Not that with shape part of have the (see drawings) tumblehome the such so is the visible vital has no step tumble- cut ……. is vital sail. stern: The stern Tumblehome it BEE helps the mid right off are wetted hull it is it the the as sloping seen only in in the difficult The stern area need was sections. at by but to differs sections reduce stern, flared actual it resulted normal on BEE section deck the flesh mind! here and details of the heavily is to reduce the surface area of and to take weight out of the ends in a 5% decrease from the AXIS area. GRAHAM: LCB ……. heavy there very much less tumblehome hull at a BEE to the to narrower {fhe reason for this deck shape Cambered deck shape at the bow the hull and hence its weight, shell at that only was at that of the boat wedge consciously, tumblehome 10 no pleasure the actually has a in quite be had balance AXIS does profile Good hull predecessor design but The stern. narrower, LCB to planing much use this all effected? it ‘’in’ the yacht. printed). the of wide very to been RABBIT a its hull change balanced’ making with from the be WHITE considered halance boat most of always to and little ‘well this lines way balance produce have towards HATTER What part does (or other centres) The ROGER: the the consideration fin relative balance? to the close the is here the point where the position and the mast relationship between of the overall play in important most position front of the fin joins the hull (see diagrams). The mast will usually be a little in front of this junction point (root). Yhe importance of this to overall balance only dawned after the bulb keel concept freed up the design of the fin. For about the first five years into this development the ‘flat’ keel shapes were copied and refined with this root starting hetween sections 3 and 4. Fins were becoming smaller and the structure needed more careful design: hence structural logic led to a vertical fin fitted centrally about the C.G. of the lead. As the root moved to suit the structure, so did the mast and back to section 5 the sails. of the of effort centre So the CE ended or up more less directly over the CB and the difference to a vane steered ‘M’ wus amazing: with little or no force depressing the bow (the down- ward component of the heeled rig being over the CB) the BLOODAXE design, when it first appeared, could outsail similar hull shapes in gusty winds by accelerating in a straight line when the gust struck rather ideal for radio to front edge the line bulb than vane sailing allow a of Luffing a and this advantage reasonable AXIS little and BRE forward slowing turning fins of is the like has the to others. be compromised performance. on ideal the line position Although of lHience the the front for for vertical of straight speed. GRAHAM: What was the reasoning behind the faired in fin on PICKAXE? ROGER: and The faired reason into the for the hull fin was on an PICKAXE obsessive 415 being fat desire to at the top reduce the G:!aivos HIDPNSETAN O ,3q1oselgDSTita3AZ8LH9I wetted down surface. Compared to the level exactly the same to the well lateral in slow Although width fin the top and yet 1} area. speed GRAHAM: to was of quite be an BLOODAXE, the more Narrow bulb square attempt advantages for to but gain with are for radio there design) (39%) was were vane sailing, a sailing. So the least to surface added don’t appear to perform and are prone to stall. greatest the wetted that inches fins situations acceptable the (on parallel necessary manoeuvring) What the manoeuvring seemingly profile slow of speed appears with the width (to increase greater PICKAXE help in upside-down the area. fin and rudder? ROGER: The question presumes if are wider the they tell on if the this BEE is and 1977 diagram) not a bulb. is from of a on volume type of minimum. the As the curve depth the fin in the As is allowed big volume is dropped to the bottom for vane coming shape at or the 10″ the down, drag maintain from stability. mid 70’s started not restricted previous the the top the hull can windward side. a narrow to lift narrow top of rudder the of advantage from kept to ‘bump’ the the and the causes there- fin on is the appendages. why stop at the class’ increasing keels be the were smaller By same time thinking and not the early of popular again This tied further which, of developed. and with significantly to 70’s of a fins hitting development displacements resistance keel existence consideration prevented start centre the practical hull The 18″ draught? Marblehead ballast. deeper restriction.The to result Marbleheads, not lakes At designers at to the of the water thickness the the during bulb lead when reducing by on and fin the edges the The theoretical being reduces why stop at the so This gradually when hull the the with A at was round windward area to used (see 6″ inclined main AXIS and top. water. a still way up but water is will PICKAXE top the up BEE? about of the is rudder also is 1980 pressed thought so unlimited for contain 15″ of of the produced sailing venues. increased to at 60’s to near a the is is reduced areas increased the There which to out time narrow at way Only right of when right the the stern leaves case has mid applies and at the the on flow fin in the surface rudder draught the the rudder 5/32″. chosen starting the the A good question: until on wide by wind ROGER: depths extent of keel the the bottom! to be 3″ off the draught of keel said rudder chord the that boat. and sectional GRAHAM: of to is is surface volume: of fin appendage the thick and designed advantage top of keel side hard the AXIS ‘boil’ pressed the the least lee controlling this 4″ the practical fuss fore the causing leaving still to are than could be AXIS keels top reaction advantage main When less a The same out was The without top. The success. away The so. which disturbed get at that were offsetting course, the was essential radio sailing in because draught was of the same lakes that desire for even lighter boats have been several attempts also caused the the allowed the big drop to 18″ started by Dave flollom with his 14 1b ASHANTI design in deeper since maximum when you 1976. Although and even successful consider before depth that there for the that 10 time, years. average 17 18″ This has is displacement remained not of to the surprising the 1985 go Keo 1M British drop ‘A’ in extra ‘9)0 fleet However, of the and deeper mid 80’s savings more of reduction than way quite is draught. we thinking you of of hull to be seen hull some spars, tumble ballast at this 12 since achieve 20″ lbs the an if total and not resistance very a have the in Level saving allow by in 25% the of rig, 19 of the weight ….. bulb acceptable of Only keel 10 1b time The permit saved associated been a with a era. might will in the so. stability weight an or has fin? the developments, allowed simplistically up allow advances question all sufficient to important which those could start long and dramatically the The lbs lightweightsailcloth particularly a 134 es acceptable. and about using still reinforcements to look 6″ could of have significant displacement future keel increased. If depth in is 1980 therefore fibre weights weight rather keel carbon Kevlar construction and a construction, carbon (MYN:21) displacement drag ins even is maintained in this drop in drop in drop If we in be tell. in the GRAHAM: Since seeing for yourself the performance of the foreign boats at the Dunkerque meeting in September, you have been experimenting with a lighter lead. Is this means of promoting offwind speed, possibly at the expense of up wind ability, the answer to other their superior performance, hull ROGER: Yes, I was variety of its aspects was see the The most sport the 22) was would joy being to and a short refined have was by in amazing machine Bill Daniel’s stood post ‘M’ forward placed root because the rig placed so far forward. are from story: the Light 19″ draught light construction factors together detail. (his rigging and make a was the in in the cost gain of a claimed easily much to 20″ As a a clear and fractions be he had of only ANJA extra before the reached reduction uncontrollable a of Gerhard the 1} Schmitt by to speed may is a limit of was with he sail could the nose factors was both So an often increase result but trap at at a that performance has can Dunkerque probably windward Lupart carry carrying necessary was downwind reason gave Helmut every What the lbs more displacement stability to upwind windward of 114 ibs, important important leads example however engineered by windward failacy design sail downwind For of downwind. It if 1960’s most the the to downwind. ultimate of the More percent goal. XVI this but under the another windward, a because countryman this of potential demonstration of result displacement. you features well performance looked water attention overpressed (nos.21 it late the matched on fashioned particular required windward above old between change and MYN opportunity! was was of displacement every In impression design. that its sails, to Walicki’s: forward, are all for a long time. These stability, and victim to at balance windward reduced fellow draught rig very careful Mylar practice of to in skipper’s performance. ballast appear equally a Looke.i beautiful improved is many Walicki’s The If and perfect terms for stability, but the overpowered desire the to boat’s seaworthyness. being with desire the capability, weight included demonstrated that whole seen with in enthusiasts. Janusz hull and sport keen pages keeping keel Dunkerque: refreshing big freeboard of The a I have profile the waves. made in the was other war chance to doubt hard was in no low saw many pressed far offwind so without described and I it designer/skipper waterline thought and seriously there what approach experience adequately the most with thorough taken the and a a impressed and boat boat, like design boat His such very exciting me. With to consider forms? the both or do we need perfection. was close than Walicki. more power because an the constantly being think this sail had to been boat was driven water. Getting back has me led important to as to the question, search reaching for new the I don’t hull proper forms. balance that This of does not experience seem displacement so and stability for existing hull shapes to get round the course in the fastest possible time. When I launched BUZZBEE I had fallen into that same trap by increasing the displacement by 4 lb compared with STING III and BLACKJACK. The result was predictable: not a significant amount more than parity to windward and a loss downwind. Since September I have experimented with different ballast weights and keel depths. Despite the number of discarded fins I am still not certain that the correct halance for my boat has been achieved: only time will tell! =O AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY ? DIFFERENT 1985 saw Chris Dicks achieve the unique distinction of winning all radio championships in one year. This was even more remarkable earlier feat of winning the same four vane championships (all metre), although not all in the same year. Of the placed four boats ist, 4th sailed a 247, he and used, 12th the in ‘Mnementh’, RM, the ‘Deception’, previous with which he was the championships. started four than his except 6 oldest, having Before serious MYA 1982 he radio racing in 1977. The 247 design can now be regarded as one of the classic RMs yet it was designed before Chris took up radio racing and departed from the norm of the time in two important aspects. The plan (MAP No. A20@ ‘vane’ rigs were 480 ) shows two sets of rigs. The mainsails sq. ins. measured area whereas the ‘radio’ of the mainsails were a massive 550 sq. ins. Although mainsails of 530 sq. ins. plus are quite common in W. Germany, the large mainsail rig has not been used very much elsewhere. When Deception was launched almost all conventionally rigged British RMs used mainsails of about 500 sq. ins. This time Chris opted for a mainsail of only 460 sq. ins., the same figure used by Torvald Klem for his ‘Lost infrequently in Shepherd ‘March on Love’ rigs. Britain prior Hare’ This to and extreme that date, of rig perhaps represented as had been used only most notably by Fred bold a step as the 247 experiment. The 247 plan also indicated a ‘raked forward’ fin, i.e. one which left the hull between stations 6 and 7 (0 being the bow) and projected forward to meet the bulb in the normal position. This type of fin had been used previously on a small number of M and 10R designs, chiefly by John Lewis, but the majority of on good directional shown as a mere those were vane yachts where stability. The choice of alternative) shunned there sucha is fin a certain (a normal conventional wisdom premium fin was which suggests that the increased fore and aft distribution of the fin area combined with a decreased distance between the fin and rudder would simultaneously reduce both the itself. Chris use, to boat’s Nevertheless is now in ‘tick’ what seemed design an and a to it any similar the process all being well, consider their response turning fin of moment profile designing was a used new RM in the Fleetwood WC in June. was that appropriate made one the to performance. very quiz and the for the which moment Deception. is scheduled for This time when he has had dissimilar him turning on the 247 and various Deception aspects of GB 22: The 1982 WC at Dunquerque was notable for its wind and top included Lost and III, Trapper, Net as or now moderately heavy. your performance and could even Although r/c which Mk Circus regarded heavy boats Seahorse Love, Suki be a strong was own marred structural by failure was there any indication that the Deception was too light a boat given the competition at the time? I have light always displacement its best associated making than to be in conditions, wave considered -strong where hence these the reduction in resistance more compensates reduction at in for any stability and driving force. In conditions, upwind performance is hardly impaired whilst the performance both reaching and running more than compensates. The actual displacement of ‘Deception’ is 11 3/4 lbs. The displacement of Pierre Jahan’s ‘M’ at the same championship was about 10 lbs and this boat placed 2nd. Pierre Jahan has subsequently produced a slightly heavier design to try to improve the windward performance, which at the Dunkirk WC appeared below average, and he attributed this mainly to the light displacement. My own observations, however, lead me to believe that this was due more to the lack of balance in the At wide this present only sterned event to very Tim little to partly to When far wave speeds greater than V//L planing so the making = to the sailing sailing greater reduced Even was gain between the than difference the marginal hull Fuller windward. Deception could due chine in 10 in a 247 the the and displacement. same 12 boat resistance i.e. of as the hump in as this lighter an the a light as boat on the any boat there was whereas the offwind boat, easier and legs, partly transition to resistance curve at speeds. Deception is a lighter than average design this perhaps why virtually no-one in this country has high level of performance with the design as yourself? With good performance lengths allowing less was heat windward acceleration 1.5 which displacement design it is critical to for Britain. achieved maintain a the Is same reasonable proportion of ballast on the hull to maintain sufficient stability. More importantly, with the Deception design, which is asymmetrical in the extreme below the water, it is critical to obtain the correct flotation line. Too forward a position of the CE causes the bow to be immersed and upsets dynamic balance, whereas too aft a position causes the stern to be immersed by too great an amount causing excessive drag at low speeds. Even with the correct stability and flotation, the relative lack of weight (inertia) makes both acceleration and deceleration very rapid. Therefore, when sailing this boat to windward, it is of paramount importance to avoid sailing off-wind, to avoid stalling and also to concentrate on maintaining o- A Ie boat speed and hence manoeuvrability. At the 1984 championship at the New Forest, the design did not perform well, lacking windward performance and at the time I did not understand the reason. However, subsequent checks on the boat showed that the internal bracing to the fin had come loose and was allowing a very connection and putting twist into the skin of between the mast and the fin. Replacement of tension/compression members solved the problem. ‘soggy’ fin/hull the hull in the region this bracing with dual (I hope!) Deception derived directly from the Illusion design which preceded 247 by 3 years. Neither of these boats bears any great similarity to the earlier successful Pterodactyl or the later Gaucho. Will your new yacht be equally different or is it based on a predecessor? “Deception’ is in fact an exact copy of Illusion, but without a bustle. The Illusion design was originally drawn in 1975 and, below the waterline, is an exact copy of the 1974 championship winning 36R design ‘Realistic’. This boat was designed to maximize stability and minimize hull resistance in order to produce a 36R which would plane. To prevent, (as much as possible), the nose burying downwind, the design incorporated both a flare in the forward sections and a bustle aft. The bustle has two effects; by moving the form of the displacement curve further aft it tends to draw the stern downwards as speed increases, and it increases displacement while not impairing the desired hull form. Spacing out the underwater sections to 5″‘ instead of 3.6” gave an increase in displacement for the Marblehead version of 13 3/4 lbs. For the Deception, the removal of the bustle reduced the displacement to 11 3/4 lbs but moved the C.B. further forward. The Illusion had a vertical fin witha big jib rig in order to keep the mast as far aft as possible and avoid overpressing the fine forward sections when heeled. The change of CB would have caused a change in fin and rig position further forward had the same fin configuration been used, so it was decided to adopt a reverse raked fin which,it was also believed,has hydrodynamic advantages (expanded upon later). Although there was no apparent similarity between the Pterodactyl and Illusion, the latter was developed directly from the former via the 36R as mentioned. The midship section was basically similar on both designs but the later design was much flatter and narrower to reduce resistance (and displacement) and more extreme in its fore and aft distribution of displacement. All other differences are more superficial than actual. The Pterodactyl, in turn, was developed from my earlier 10R design ‘Shallah’. (There is nothing new under the sun, they say, only different variations on a theme). The Deception design is as extreme as I would like to go along the path of this line of development and the new boat will therefore be completely different. Following a line of development is interesting but usually only leads to a gradual increase in one aspect of performance, often at the expense of some other features. (Compromise as always!). I believe that the current top designs at any time have a marked influence on any new design as these are the yardstick by which a new design will be evaluated, and the trick with RM’s is to see where a major improvement is currently possible, and to then try to achieve this improvement without sacrificing any other aspects of performance. Of course, a completely new design (although it will inevitably be influenced by other designs) carries a greater risk of failure. The 10R with which you won the 1985 Championship was built by the designer, Bengt Bellander, by planking in foam and sheathing with resin and cloth. Your new yacht will be built in the same way. Assuming this produces a lighter hull will the saving be used to give a lower displacement for the same ballast ratio, or to give a higher ballast ratio at the same Im displacement? Any saving increase in the However, hull lead when effect on certain ballast designing construction it stability whilst performance. weight a weight a new given and design therefore yacht to take should the always stability advantage of a be of used the to yacht. lighter hull would be logical to maintain the required amount of decreasing the displacement hence giving better offwind Taken to windward extremes, performance however, and lead to this an could overall have lower too great an performance in conditions. What was the philosophy behind the choice of the large rig for when the the on mainsail 247? At the ‘247’ time design there was seemed boats to be area the maximum most lack downwind, therefore mainsail, on a sail drawn, in and area put was into order of the to try to overcome the lack ofa Spinnaker (vane to some sailor’s This rig extent. thinking!) caused handling some problems, particularly when gybing and with hindsight, I believe that a more Conventional rig proportion would been better for boat. have this Deception was rigged using CF masts. Were these the key to making rigs work efficiently? – or merely another means of weight saving? the Due to the narrow deck beam, giving a very shallow shroud angle, and the smaller angle of the backstay, the jib luff on the 247 is quite difficult to keep tight. A a result, the heavy rigging loads produce a large compressive stress in the mast, which on the taller rigs leads to compressive buckling in duralumin masts. For duralumin masts therefore a more complicated rigging system would have been required to restrain the mast at closer points or it would iave been necessary to have reduced the rigging carbon fibre prevent was the only level. sailing, for masts mast to bend in suit were from overcome The adjusted bend tensions and accept by although if deck the slightly, the shrouds at be of is but buckle a keel luff. this under deck in slackening the the As originally was mast rigidly and is tallest lee still extreme stepped therefore a overpressed leeward designs to jib prevailing conditions, to Can use mast slacker stepped, tending the the a restraint induced rig, self the due to the sufficient conditions, with not shroud, not rigged, bend and this at deck which adjusting mast the to will is while still narrow base level. matched to certain rigs (or vice versa) or do subscribe to the view that any rig can be used on any hull provided 2t you that mast I no position is optimised? believe that most rigs can be matched to most hull forms and there are general guidelines. The key should be using the rig which will offset a design’s bad points of sailing whilst not impairing When laying down the lines of a new hull to ensure the design is what what the good points. features do you is normally called incorporate ‘well balanced’? I always check the LCB movement for a heel angle of between 25° and 30° depending on the type of hull form. (Narrower hulls – greater heel angle). I try to obtain a movement of no greater than 0.2% LWL aft or 0.05% LWL forward. Whether the figures calculated can actually be measured to the degree of accuracy required to obtain this, I doubt, but this should be the aim, doing the whole exercise 3 times as a check on accuracy. I believe this form onerous have out for seen of of ‘balancing’ radio boats in strong characteristics essential where some radio boats control What fin? is the for skipper vane boats, can have some which are obviously not but not control. ‘balanced’ quite so However, go I completely conditions. of performance do you attribute to the raked forward The advantage of the raked forward fin is twofold. Firstly it causes any crossflow to be towards the hull surface. This reduces the dynamic shift of the centre of lift of the fin due to the build up of pressure on the upper portions of the fin.It also reduces tip loss at the bottom edge of the fin, which is partially prevented in any case by the lead bulb. The rig witha raked fin, forward leading buoyancy of forward fin vertical, Extreme fin to a the or rake hull. led also more to It a of the be positioned coincident was much slightly due to the spread on the Deception problem can extremely better raked fin centre aft leads to and provide of balanced fin a very and which loss aft effort noticeable of the lateral area. when compared with completely, further of I than of on the the more also with rig 247 and steerability the boat on in vertical centre that docile tried a raked than the this some of design. conditions However, a slight reduction in rake the 247 has seemed to remove this quick tacking ability which is one of the boat’s strong points. Deception was originally 20% chord The trim length. fitted What were tab originally its with a servo controlled trim tab of about advantages? employed on Deception enabled an asymmetrical fin section to be adjusted for either tack with the aim of improving lift. This certainly worked but only at the expense apparent that the trim tab was only useful of in i.e. the if tacks, just or if effectively not fetching the to leeward of ‘point windward another higher’. In You abandoned In view outweighed the saving of in the the any centre area advantage and given, gained the trim tab would trim tab could terms, the the boat due to with tab along with reasons weight of boat, general virtually no effect on the trim of the longitudinal RM’s. mark increased drag. certain tactical the narrow jib trimmer, the the and improvement added I in 2s felt use its fins close be the extra used tab to had proximity to in use on why? for reliability avoid currently complexity of that of It became situations all was the trim round more tab far performance desirable. The jib trimmer was far more useful, generally, in balancing the trim, but is difficult to use at long distance due to the inability to see accurately the jib setting. This was abandoned at a much later date in the quest for absolute simplicity which the swing rig now achieves. Do you plan to use the same type of The I feel new design it is will have even more a raked suitable fin on your new forward for the fin swing ‘swing rigged’ similar rig to with the its boat? Deception smaller as jibs. Some RMs in Britain and elsewhere have sprouted ‘winged” keels since 1983 and your own ‘A’ class Fraggle made use of a lead bulb which tended in this direction. Is there any reason section ballast weight for a RM? to diverge from the choice of a round The use of winged keels has become a fashion since Australia II which I feel is unfortunate since a great number of people do not seem to appreciate its advantages and disadvantages. If a fixed draught keel with a circular bulb is compared with a similar draught keel with a ‘winged keel’, the winged keel will have slightly greater lift at high angles of keel than the circular bulb due to both the increase in draught and the excellent end plate effect of the wings. However, if the wings are placed vertically below the keel, effectively increasing the draught, then this configuration will be superior in terms of lift to both the previous examples due to the increase in draught. It can therfore quite clearly be seen that the winged keel only really has a sensible application when the draught is limited. It is also clear that the winged keel has a greater drag coefficient than a round bulbed keel, particularly when the lift required to be generated is small (broad reaching). I can therefore on RM class see no sensible application of the winged keel yachts. It should also be remembered that the 12-metres sailing in the America’s Cup had not even adopted the ‘bulb keel’ configuration but were similar to rather older types of ‘A’ class yacht. It is quite possible therefore that the advantage of the ‘winged keel’ used by Australia II lay not so much in the improvement of the lift/drag ratio but more simply by lowering the centre It of gravity, should raked also forward. be It thereby noted is enabling that possible better than ‘Australia II’ the that a lighter leading a bulb around the yacht edge of keeled to maintain the ‘winged 12-metre course due to the may stability. keel’ have was proved better reaching performance. The winged keel configurations lateral the centre boat certainly off-wind heels, true when also having of has the area of thereby on the pressed the wings advantage towards to the rear of the that fin, the combined fin and wings tends offsetting ‘A’ (disadvantage?) class any lack of balance in with the current projected to move aft as the boat. This is where the boat has a marked tendency to run windward although the volumetric balance would indicate a slight luffing tendency. It may be this factor that has led to the allegations of Australia II being difficult to ‘get in the groove’ to windward. 26 chairman’s column MODEL YACHTING ASSOCIATION -— ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 198 Held at the CCPR Cffice in London on 30th November, the meeting was attended by only 27 members representing 18 clubs, which shows a certain lack of interest in the Association’s affuirs, to say the least. However, this may be partly explained by the rather uninteresting agenda and also that the date clashed with the Birkenhead Club’s annual dinner, which accounted for a few absentees. It was suggested that the ACM might be better attended if it were to be combined with an annual dinner and held in the Midlands and this would be considered by Council at The Chairman informed the meeting that Harry Andrews, its January meeting. a Vice-President and General Secretary of the Association from 1960/66, had died suddenly in September and the meeting stood The main in tribute. points from the Chairman’s report were:- Membership Remained at SO clubs and 50 individual members, & fewer than in 1984. Re, istrations Showed a modest increase of 56 boats in the total flect of 703. This was the first time in four years that the total had exceeded 700, In the respective classes, ‘A’s and ‘RA’s showed a slight reduction but 10 Raters made 2 small recovery of 22 beats after the steady decline of the past few years. Marbleheads and 6 Metres remained much the same but there had been quite a surprising increase in the 36″ Restricted Class, vane and radio, of 41 boats and it was now the second most popular overall. Funds The Association’s finances continued The main points to be healthy, with capital in excess of 23000. arising from the mecting were:- Officers All currently serving Officers were re-elected. The Chairman announced that he intended to retire from the Chair at the 1986 AGM, when he will have served for 10 years as Chairman and as a member of Council for 40 years. Roy Gardner and Vic Smeed were elected Vice-Presidents of the Association. Constitution The revised draft was given formal approval and copies will be distributed to all affiliated clubs and individual members as soon as possible. Chief Measurer The meeting approved the establishment an Executive of the Cfficer and member of Council. Rating Regulations will be position of Chief Measurer, who will be The Constitution, amended accordingly. The Competition Rules and position will be filled by co-option of a suitable candidate at the January Council meeting. Supplies Secretary This new post was approved and the Constitution will be further amended to include David Hackwood volunteered to take on the In future, all job and his orders for MYA publications, badges, it. offer was gratcfully accepted. stickers &c at 10, Grangewood, Coulby Newham, Middlesbrough, Cleveland, should be sent to him TS8 ORT. A price list is published in the Year Book. 36″ Restricted Class Rules Council’s motion to delete from Rule 7 the phrase “with the exception of Rule 5{c)” was carried by a large majority, thus allowing boats registered before 31st December, C.F. spars before although requisite that it was not age was its effect conparatively the effectively rescindins the date to continue intention of to re-rig with spars the. to use 1984 cheap. 27 amendment 1983 that had been fitted with GRP or them. The reason for this amendment other than wood and it therefore defeated the 1984 to allow or metal, orisinal object it any boat is that, of the was kmown that this of keeping the class MYA. LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIT — Awards were made as 198 follows:- RADIO VAN Division 1 only two 1664 2 Dovecote 399 3 Birkenhead 307 Individual Robert Smith (Leicester) 431 Division 1 2 Birkenhead Southgate Individual Mike Harris (Bournville) 453 COUNCIL MEETING – 25th January, There were Cnelnsford 1989 297 4 1986 absentees from the first statutory Council meeting of the year and the Chairman welcomed the two new Councillors from the Midland District, Bellerson and David Andrews. Vic World Championship entry By the time this report appears be the selection race for this year’s World Championship, at Easter, in print, or may even have taken place. Worlds of £35 per boat will have to be wish to be considered for a place undertake to assist with the qualify to sail, the RM Nationals at Fleetwood, will which will soon be due to start It was confirmed that the entry fee to the paid by all entrants to the Nationals in the Worlds. At the same time, they must organisation and xrmming of the event if in which case their entry fee would be refunded. if they they do not Otherwise, if a skipper fails to honour his commitment, he would forfeit his entry fee. ixhibitions The Exhibitions Secretary, Graham Pautock, for manning the stand at the reported that there had been good support ‘Model Engineer’ who had volunteered their services. The level quite high and many enquiries were exhibition and he was grateful to all of public answered daily. interest this year had been Tiieg MYA had been offered a large site in a prominent position at the ‘Sailboat ’86’ Show at Crystal Palace on 8/9th March and Graham emphasized that adequate manning of the stand would be essential if, as the organisers expected, it were to be up to professional standard, It was planned to exhibit a collection of vint#e 10 Raters to demonstrate the develoyment of design in the class over the past hundred years of its life. Nuttall Award It was originally intended that this award should be made for outstanding service to the Association during a particular year, not necessarily every year. However, since the first award four years ago, there have been four recipients and one received it for services over a long period. In future, it may not always be possible to find a deserving recipient annually and therefore, in order not to lessen the value of the award by insisting that it must be presented to someone regardless of the original intention and since it should be considered a great honour, Council proposes that the award should be made for lifetime service, that it should originate from Council and not from clubs and that it should not be linked to particular years, therefore the trophy should not be dated. These proposals will appear in an acquaint and clubs will be invited to make their views known for consideration by Council at the May meeting. AGM venue Council discussed the proposal made at the 1985 AGM to move the venue from London to Birmingham, in the hope that it would attract a better attendance. This had been tried before, without.the desired result and the conclusion was that a second attempt would not be justified, majority is London. especially as the easiest access to the meeting for the A further proposal to link the ACM to an annual Dinner was rejected on the grounds that it would be too expensive in London. Another suggestion that a Dinner might be linked to a major event was also rejected because it would be too early in the year to present awards and also because not all those who might wish to attend a Dinner would necessarily take part in the event, which could be cither for vane or radio. 28 Finance The Treasurer reported that, to date, 30 clubs had paid their subscriptions and the income received showed a slight increase in membership. South Africa After receiving the Chairman’s written report of IMYRU, Council agreed that, same line as the IMYRU by not of the meeting of the Permanent Committee for the foreseeable future, the MYA would follow the accepting entries from South African skippers for any of its national events. National Championships The Vane ‘M’ Championship will be held at Fleetwood at the beginning of May but, Fleetwood Club is under pressure with the as the organisation of the World Championship, the Leeds & Bradford Club will take over the responsibility of running the event at Fleetwood. Entries will therefore have to be sent to Leeds & Bradford, NOT Fleetwood. Incidentally, it is Leeds & Bradford’s centenary year and we extend to this old- established club our heartiest congratulations and best wishes for the future. Council decided that the Novice Trophy, which is awarded at the R36r Nationals to the highest scoring skipper who has never won a national championship, can only be won once and this is effective at this year’s event. Roger Stollery has produced a set of proposals to standardise procedures for the Race of Champions. Included in the proposals is one to limit the entry to a maximum of 16, with 4 skippers to be eliminated after the match racing series, leaving a fleet of 12 boats to race together on the second day. Various ways have been suggested for filling the 16 places and a final decision will be taken at the May meeting. Meanwhile, it was ruled that a skipper may only qualify in his own District Championship. Dovecote S.C. will be hosting the event this year and an appeal will be made for assistance in running the event. Chief Measurer George Clark of Danson M.Y.C. has been elected Chief Measurer of the MYA and this post carries with it ex-officio membership of Council. Yachting Monthly Cup It was reported that the Editor of “Yachting Monthly’ has expressed interest in the future of the Cup. This was discussed at some length by Council, not for the first time however, the outcome being that the MYA Racing Secretary, Peter Maskell, will gather the Vane ‘A’ boat skippers together at Gosport in August to try to obtain agreement on a new system of competition for the Cup. This year’s competition will be run on the same lines as in the past but in 1987 it will be competed for on a basis to be decided by Council, taking into account the views of the ‘A’ Class skippers. The competition will then be reviewed by Council to examine whether or not it would be worth while continuing with it. It was agreed that the ‘A’ Class Regatta Fund should be used to offer hospitality to foreign entrants as a means of encouraging entries for the Y.M. Cup. RM World Championship Trophy As the result of the IMYRU’s decision to withdraw the South Africa Cup from the World Championship this year, it is necessary to provide be made to the “Yachting World’ a replacement. An approach is to proprietors to donate a suitable trophy but, if this fails, the MYA would put up a maximum of £250 for this purpose. Insurance The Woodspring Club has arranged, through a broker, policy for steam and electric models, additional cover on their MYA including electric racing boats, for a premium of £10 per annum. The broker would deal direct with any club requiring this form of cover and the terms of the main MYA policy for yachting would not be affected, Secretary of the Woodspring Club would be pleased to answer enquiries. Norman Hatfield, Chairman. 29 The JAPANESE RM CHAMPIONSHIP It is said in Japan that if you see Mount Fuji you will have good luck. Well there on the morning of race was Mount Fuji in all its glory, the only problem was that I was still in Tokyo and the RM Championship was being held some 600 miles away! My problems started 72 hours or so earlier at Heathrow, arriving comfortably at 3 o’clock on 3lst October to catch my flight to Tokyo due to leave at 4 o’clock, Tf find all the check desks closed, no airline staff onduty, panic begins to set in, check the ticket, no definitely 4 o’clock departure, find Japanese Airline staff ‘Oh sorry sir, the plane left at 2.30 pm, new winter schedule you know, weren’t vou told!’ Anyway to cut a long story short I eventually got away 224 hours later, thus losing my spare day in Japan’to have some practice. A one hour flight from Tokyo followed by a slow 14 hour drive got me to the Lake an hour before the start, this being a holiday weekend in Japan and the fine weather had brought everyone out. Lake Biwa is a renowned Japanese tourist area and the RM Championship was being held at the southern end, the northern end is more than 20 miles away. It was also obvious immediately that there was a considerable swell on the lake, with waves breaking on the foreshore and virtually no wind! The Japanese, being keen on ceremonies, held an official opening ceremony, at which the previous champion formally hands back the trophy, the 0.0.D. gives his briefing, which was listened to with great seriousness by the skippers, and as I was the first European to sail there I was invited to make a short speech, not in Japanese! The meeting had not been well supported by the Japanese as only 16 had entered, usually their RM Championship when held in Tokyo or Nagoya attracts 30-40 skippers. The Japanese who did not come evidently do not like Lake Biwa because of its renowned lack of wind and considerable swell, they prefer the more English type lakes at the other locations. On Sunday evening, all the competitors ate together at a special dinner. At the end of the meal, each competitor had to make a little speech, most of these ended up with a question about what was happening in “iodel Yachting in the U.K. I was given a substantial number of souvenirs by the JMYS and a small present from the hotel. Fortunately I had taken some small souvenirs to return the compliment, although I think they were more pleased to receive the catalogues of Messrs Andrews and Pantock! Organisation The racing system was a standard schedule with 6 boats per race, with the exception Despite being the leading that you never met the boat on the same freauency. manufacturing national of the R/C equipment, they have only eight frequencies to work with, the solids in the 27Mhz and 2 in the 40 Mhz, although they have been Splits, as we use in the U.K. are promised 6 more for next year in the 40 Mhz band. not permitted. Racing Rules The rules used were generally in accordance with the current “YA rules, the only significant difference being that if a boat caused a race to be cancelled and resailed, because it had badly impeded another boat, then the offending boat was disqualified from the resail. Fortuitously calls such as ‘starboard’, ‘overlap’ and ‘protest’ were generally in English. The Competitions As stated previously the event was poorly supported and just 16 boats arrived with 4 skippers also bringing along their P10R for that championship as well. Generally a full Olympic triangle and sausage was sailed, although in periods of no wind this was reduced to just a triangle. With such a large lake the course was pretty lona and judqing when was round a buoy could prove difficult at times, especially in the worst of the swell when the buoys disappeared from view in the troughs! It was noticeable that the majority of local skippers save the buoys considerable space. it is called locally, Despites the lake’s size there was weed, or of the four races I ary ‘marine growth’ as sailed on the Sunday in 3 the boat came back trailing the wretched exceptions, their if the problem did not fin was the stuff. in It was interesting to note, affect the Japanese boats as the line with the front of the lead, lead protruded in front of the the problem only seems to occur is the swell, the wind had been blowing, guite strongly during the day before and with a length of over 20 miles a considerable swell had built up, very difficult conditions. way about leading edge of fin. The other real problem with this lake evidently, that with two 2ft wide! this combined with little or no wind made for Sailing was done from the end of 4ft above the water and projecting some this made judging the a none too 150ft stable walk- into the lake, start difficult as generally it was not possible to sight along the line. The Boats I suppose the most noticeable modern materials this apparent local feature of the boats was the lack of so commonly seen lack of in the U.K. sophistication the sophistication and and European boats. leading boats were However despite ideally set up for the conditions. The boats generally had fairly on the apparent height of the shallow freeboard and considerable comment was made freeboard on my boat. However they did say that all their boats tend to dive the bow under the off wind in anything but the most gentle of blows. No attempt was made sheets which slid to seal hatches and into place and these had no were effective nearly all seal. Radio simply thin persnex equipment within the boat had no additional protection and was open to any water which found its way in. One interesting point, push rod assemblies, despite Japan having readily available many nicely engineered all the competitors used wooden pushrods with a short length of wire attached to each end for hooking on to the servo horn and rudder arm. The winning boat of Todashi Katoh and the weighed about 14 lbs, identical with their maximum beam set 3rd place of Hiroshi Ehisu fairly well aft, from the prohotgraphs the rudder blades are comparatively equipped with beautifully made wooden The ‘Groovy’ jib and main had uphauls and these were side of the mast, these boats jib traveller made deck on a piece of cord. The the hull white from two They were both little brass cleats on Yoshihiko in colour deck was 0.2mm machine made and the standing rigging was fast to cleats on the deck. fishing rod eyes that Ishikawa was has to be the original lightweight so thin that you could see through it fibre epoxy sheet, to give it a little weighed weighed Sails, of all (Toray I am told), that the winch the competitors, Three quarter it is and the like an opaque temporcon cloth. leach was inch head boards immediately below this was some 4 or would measure in the U.K. 5 inches. bother about a few centimetres! was 20% could take note of Every the rigs were about 70 had spent lot of boat It the flows it the width of the is pretty doubtful in them, A quick measure of one carried if sail their to me after a few glasses of its registration time inches tall, experimenting even on the 10 raters, with rig height at 70 inches rig gave the best performance because of the It was significant All suit showed number, sails sake! it something we in the U.K. All a fitted but as once of them put oversize!! in place cut with the allowance over the whole were we do not about stiffness 250gms! sails were panelled as the photographs show and were cut with enormous length. the were home made from a locally produced 1.50z cloth in appearance which were not measured, and internal the bare hull with servo and winch but of Both ran across the ribs of 0.5mm epoxy sheet were fitted, 500 gms, the KXatoh’s boat was also fitted with a jib twitcher. second place boat of special, to likewise the outhauls on the booms, had a seen masts and laminated wooden booms. fastened fine wire with cord ends which again were made short. as can be that all the Japanese arrived this wave Tadashi Katoh said he lake and (swell) with just one found that problem. suit of sails, they obviously had good connections with the weatherman. All inasts were deck mounted, and one was be even mounted on used rigging screws for for making things fast. a shroud servo so that tension and Bowsies were it there was a almost 3l could rotated. Very few boats proliferation of small conspicuous by their a absence, cleats although ‘ Es A shot of the deck of Tadashi Katoh’s RM, note the wooden mast and boom, the cleats for anchoring the shrouds and the jib traveller from two fishing rod eyes. The RM of J.M.Y.S. President Kazuo Naito, s very heavy boat, quickly but would not point. which went surprisingly The one fitting I did acquire from one or two boats used them for sheet adjustment. them was their jib swivels which were locally made stainless steel fishing swivels with an internal bearing, so even under substantial load they rotated very freely. General In conclusion I would say it was a long way to go for comparatively few races, and would not be worth undertaking unless it can be combined with a business trip, as I hope it has helped to re-establish contact between the Japanese and mine was. the IMYRU and that we will see some Japanese at the ’86 World Championship, subject to their getting the paper work sorted out. @ REPORT AND PHOTOS FROM DAVID COODE @ acs Hen TS Next issue ) 9th ALL JAPAN YACHTING CHAMPIONSHIP FOR MARBLEHEAD CLASS Results Position 1 2 3 Name Tadashi Katoh Yoshihiko Ishikawa Hiroshi Ebisu Score 0 SL 6.8 Sail no. g 145 J 317 J 110 4 5 6 v 8 o= Kazuo Kunihiro Kenichi Yokota Kenji Ikeda Shigei Maki Motoji Munesuke Yutaka Yokoyama David Coode 17.1 17.1 16.7 20 22.7 29 29 J 349 231 J 359 J 301 J 447 J*357 K 3616 PORTUGAL I take this opportunity to speak.a little about our APMU Sailing Models). Since joining IMYRU, (Portuguese Association for from 1984 we have regular activities with one regatta monthly and two major international events: in gune at Pedras D’El Rei (Algarve) and in October at Carcais We use the R.C. (salt 1 (near Lisbon). Yacht Racing System edited by IMYRU. lake 100 x 100 m) raced by 27 skippers – In 1985 at Pedras D’El Rei 9 from Portugal and 17 from Spain and from England. We raced 10 races 1 – B. Jackson 2 – R. 3 4 (3 fleets) and the first 10 were: G.B. 6 – A. Rodriguez E Rodriguez E, 7 – B. Deridirio £E – N. Claudio E. 8 – J. Gonzalez E – J. Figueiredo P. 9 – Maneto E Medina E. Perez E 5 – C. P. 10 – F. The wind was variable and off last day. At Carceris Spain and waves. (bay at the sea) 10 we raced the 2nd Iberian with 24 from Portugal. We raced 7 races Classification of first (3 fleets). skippers E 6 Li. 2 – J. Figueiredo P 7 M. Morniz P 3 – J. Betancor E 8 J. Cardona E 4 – N. Ortega E 9 L. Ramos E 5 Diaz E 10 E,. Remagut E As you can see few Portuguese few training races, The other problem are not very the protests, is but I the judges, familiar with the possible, we would year will E speed and (Canadian) and G. be better. as they are used to racing cruising boats, number so the time between races are (our champion 84 and 85) Espinoza in top places but model yachts are recent and we have think next Our boats are mainly Kitsach of little boats and of exchange so they course slow motion. and Toads Bantock; these (U.S.A.), sails from J. Figueiredo electronics from Tutala and Whirlwind. we would like to see news about our Association in your next MYN, like to from 10: Claudio S. 14 Wind variable and some 1 – N. – – ideas with English Clubs. J.L. APMV 33 MORAIS and If also WHY The various into two racing the ‘Grillhazard’ at Chris as a of other element be a in of chance racing top boats is may is chance be boats of every race. of racing, a the this by and full round. As sailing size in race full as whole back points are with the points. This and championships big to meet to enjoy proper each on of other their finale to the fleet. is because and get to skipper ahility of the top the is likely once. with the boats. at be brief ends to difficulties, into heats tournament up on it consistent in the is to course at the with ‘the scoring suited in Because visual divided heat other once. position top each this race’ minimum open meetings skippers have more opportunity competition that they are It because it an will developed whether is to was the a particularly waters. race and from Scoring is There bottom against sails have according winner racing home a similar awarded only form ot winners There course the racing, everyone each as least the recently considered score and is meet, but this series where all size compete results race, at of race boats frequencies the size of to competitors by others full fleet which radio and determined the and of a top is races. heat over front each heat latter French pioneered these out the like as in the in for The the order. others of known who divided racing. same finishing strung able the of some are each each more nothing boats schedule gets be racing, witiiin or initially against or all more Leg ability ina idea a is possible ability, ability where restrictions isn’t front a meets meet of system the broadly match ability down can tournament choice winner who nature races equal on will finishing There mimic so sailing by the the about skipper The Heat of and tournament and and today schedule, mixed the RACING ? use racing where the In heats, each by and itself mixture that system Dicks. race heat in traditional random, by systems categories: encompasses made HEAT is excellent skippers have for the not producing chance able a of affecting the outcome of the event in the last few races. The bottom skippers get the advantage that they have a real chance of winning races on the water whereas they have next to no chance in tournament Obviously the racing. splitting of the race into heats has advantages and disadvantages. In the end these even out and six of one becomes half a dozen of the other. Take for example a skipper in ‘B’ heat of a three heat race; compared to the full size race, he could be’cushioned!’ from a very Low position and he from achieving a very good position by the might be ‘limited’ division into heats. ‘fake for example Alf LARRAMAN who finished 13th out of 31 at the 1985 Mermaid Trophy. (See race analysis example). In race 1 he finished at the bottom of heat ‘A’ in 12th place which might have been lower it this was a full size race because in race 2 he finished at the bottom of heat ‘B’ in 19th place. In race 4 he finished first in heat ‘B’ in LOth place, which might have been higher because he tinished 9th in the next ‘A’ heat race. In this case no real advantage or disadvantage prevailed so the result is not much different from that which might have been achieved in a full size race. In the right hand column of this race analysis will be seen the range of finishing positions achieved. Whit is remarkable here is that the average range (to the nearest position) is 7. The biggest variation was achieved by Melvyn DACKOMBE in 9th place 34 AM ILDFORD MobeEL YACHT CUB MERIWVEID’ BF 3 DV BS. LEToD DU 2 RALES CE BE YDD lerkY PS1TVONS ROUND APTER i WILLOW PARAL , ko 3% Lanett a BE Oe So Z ROUND WHID, RATES 1 Seen enTeves 2 ht aT | 4 ta Sr FNAL OF poeireon PrSuTENS | PNIAINA S CLEAVE, roe cx Vax PAS CT A Rant #2 pRekeR SOU ERY R, xrRMIEYE Re Panto a7 WW 5 fA 5 PRRACER ASE bX Nes a \ oa4 [erouere PT OVePie L 7 MRAWAY A WH But nes, Sa IN Ky Wo ak I) Ys [ove LaRRAMWRN | PRCAY Wee Sc STO WER Y RP 7 Rec $7 | bemineg PANITOCK 8 Wit eet Ia 6 | OWENS FowleR 19 ahh LV __paUOMBE Ho |10 te STDea AN A owns I aN ot] HoUNSELL. fot C OUN CTRAVS AE 2 r e ee v7 ke 4 | Paticomee |, Nie [Fowler P| VW | Hounsen In| Dcs ~~ 8B A. I6 AD [12 vw G eePr BL larRamans | 10 : FATS ip }a Ol4A|vaHTON | 5 WA e oe fy: a Ke Wel cone Se YY Ore FINICH 16 ot : yA we s, ely | ROBIN S (“7 c a b ea t wee s e r woot fy201as ; \a / 421 | Co oK 1 2 ; weesS___[23ae4_s | ¥\ $ 2 ] TA YL OR W w |Z g\ N \ L E n B T A A T C a p 2 3 AWLEN 2 iG A NZ el. cA 14 o®5 COOK . PARIRY matowanT E N A AS ak #25] ce Ro HnKe Vai A V E R Y 22| P a [27gfe|l VHAWes e227 GS | Aven u”G ¥% | Shan) a 5 Beier ad VANS) RY \\Jan ine SRA! a TAG a? or AVERATIVE RAN OS OF PINISHINA POTIONS | 114 as performance with as the competitors these skippers other competitors could not Most beat readers controlled many was may for use 51 from big in with a in set out to and tested been alternative lot as of by event the 1983 which the there races. of by It European Championship developed hosts. several limited to a and a that does not count forms the preliminary several minimum days, any in and Although shortcomings boat take remote although 10 that they ‘The IMYRU Swedish is race of was were against heat. existence The by IMYRU could for running the very event. heat to variety make the the same maximum of 3 boat of the scores round: which in case a the from an systems. of format to system two available, the systems in both this terminology tried R.C.Y.R.S. Alternatives progress and was of racing the most 1986 World Championships, adoption in and idea that new ideas the best Since developments collection choice the system that this uses the complete system racing R.C.Y.R.S. with the related systems. As to this next of discounted. several developed added using this . the example Each sailed lower adopted it preparation and the used this ensure tournament were be for system’ maximum tournament The MYA, have a of previous FARLEY. they in the have for scoring cannot know in the and when above remained international championship scores run adopted big and the racing but heats probably Compare BARKER heats, the and specially boats heats, from actually subsequently FINCHAM, their them successfully published of won yacht progresses. DICKS, will not race of the ‘A’ and area. as the there Each IMYRU the IMYRU might adopt several evolved new alternatives might give OODs increasing of range Unfortunately the international of events experiences IMYRU ‘B’ be a published Permanent Committee decided against this and have decided on a more conservative approach of retaining only one system and modifying the original system using some of the ideas developed on Alternatives ‘A’ and ‘B’. This will be tried for the first time at the MYA RM Nationals at Easter in preparation for its use at the RM Worlds in July. Although Alternatives ‘A’ and ‘B’ have not received official recognition by IMYRU, they are, nevertheless, advanced and tested systems produced for international competition that may be of interest to those who organise races at open meeting or higher level. Alternative entry; ‘A’ has the following features: a maximum of 12 boat preliminary round with a 94 boat maximum and a minimum of 5 boat heats; either a 3 race seeding round or a a Grillhazard or a traditional schedule tournament round giving maximum flexibility for short, medium or long time scales; ‘natural’ as opposed to ‘artificial’ promotion and relegation as described earlier; a scoring system that equates the scoring in the tournament round exactly to that in the heat racing; heat scoring based on a simple finishing order basis (without complicated penalty and bonus additions or overlapping scores). Alternative ‘B’ has the following features: an 84 boat maximum entry; a maximum of 12 boat and a minimum of 5 boat heats; a preliminary round using either Grillhazard or a traditional schedule tournament round; ‘artificial’ promotion and relegation as in the original system but with the number of boats promoted reducing from 4 to 2 in uniform steps 36 as the event progresses; eka a0 WNa le la ila e s aTRaieno LaoAANNSeAeTKeWarlAeAIaalpRRiAentStaatoweerrmn NEMSAeWYSe eTHc17_P|9IS/|;R3LNeO0oXs8se?[2Yi9NarUaARnSEA(WNWCDySGr‘KnRI4MtGL\NUcsGa:lEiWv\AyVv|/phWppYeuly7Ii8fLnsXdOaSea¢971!SI|aodHe1NNoOerwI’‘*¥ J 37 with 16 with just (3rd indicate one 2 above or expect to racing equals and not chance race group! the leaders covering, this and will not of in This fast on the a is boats have making lower to 10 event are the there because in these about mistakes place races about 4 8, so places skippers sailing water important think of thrashed by the course. Skippers front, 1Oth other finish placed they on race of in position. winning to big the FOWLER positions average because on Don analysis finishing racing behind by finishing consistently some this of water have following will their skippers be 10 of of the in winners merely who defence all against do instead and much top skippers in the bottom skippers the etc. as get are infrequent their position, excitement that brings. Those whose trying approach because consider the advice magazine win. goal system heats of the doing of question based involved that to racing. on in allows sail each Walker of disaster to “Don’t and get of to of If winning your the from heat skippers at the top and other decide who is been above. on between of achieved Heat maintained promoted get follow.” has bottom trying causes simply will of a psyched-up heat always skippers to quote in really note you have transfer I take follows. top I and point should attitude correctly the way no win-or-fail promotion merit the a is points” on things getting 20 books winning, and get “there this many not decisions the system are will is in Dr.Stuart you racing racing by Once be of I article job must win so the a I fleet in If is if ‘C’ advantages with there even to given inaccurate is the being heat, Similar final far other least competitor them from to range his on the llth). leave heat the a and tournament better any to average below Compared who 19th) (9th an might to racing that heats. merit A adjacent and relegated is entirely consistent with this merit system and the full size race on which it is based. It is my opinion that this is the fairest way to handle this question. It formed the basis of the first fleet racing systems that I published some two years ago, (Model Boats May 1979 and May 1980) and currently the Alternative ‘A’ developed for the 1986 RM World Championship. Other forms of heat racing promote or relegate skippers at the top and bottom of adjacent heats ‘artificially’ without allowing competition between them. Can anyone really justify how someone who finishes third in ‘B’ heat should be promoted above someone finishing 5 places above them? There is no way that this can be considered Race fair. of Champions The analysis which was of the heat racing at run using the the 1985 Alternative’B’ system illustrates this point clearly. Andrew SMITH finished 3rd in ‘B’ heat in races 3 and 5 and was promoted to heat ‘A’ as a consequence. Out of his depth against better opposition in heat’A’ he finished last on each occasion. This was a complete waste of time for him and for the ‘A’ heat skippers he displaced. You can see from the pattern of crossed lines how much pointless going up and down is involved with this system of promotion. By contrast, compare the progression of skippers in the 1985 Mermaid under Alternative ‘A’. Under this system the size of heats between odd and even races is varied and this is shown on the race analysis by the thick horizontal lines in each column. This allows the’natural’ movement of skippers based on their 36 a scoring scores; extent Space but system heat scoring related does to not equates based the permit interested too delighted to supply STOLLERY, 6 on tournament overlapping of boats publishing is ROGER exactly number anyone to if that in them. the Please LITTLE TUMNERS scoring promoted text receiving and of a send these T S.A.®. COURT, with and copy heat the relegated. systema would be (l6cm x GODALMING, here only 22cm SURREY, approx. ) GU7 2HF, ODDS & ENDS FOR SALE STOLLEPY BEE RM. Ray Hewitt, 0705 Tall 551559 “BLACK” MYLAR SAILS. Black. Unused. E. Shaw, Offers The £30 to D. 3 only; with plans. or White hull. (evenings) High Aspect 21 Leelands, TRAPPER MK4. rig 4 oz. Mylar, 300/500 ratio, by noted American Chuck near. Lymington, conventional Stapleton, Hants. suits and S041 1 8EY swing rig. 21 Ravensbourne Drive, With Chelmsford or without Radio 0245 and Winch. 262364 Editor, Model Yachting News. As you are aware, the Solent Club avopted the R-36-R Class some eighteen months ago, and now has a reasonable sized fleet of these little boats, which gives excellent and close racing, bidding fair to replace the Ri Class cumpletely for our mid-week racing. However, views are being expressed in favour of change, preferrably to something which really boils down to the American 36/606 Class, possibly including limiting the number of suits of sails permissible. to either I seem to remember the Canedian, 800 Sterne, writing MYN or that-other=publication-which-no—longer-recognises—model-yachting-as—a—model boating-activity, advocating such a change in favour of international unity, so this is being written to ask if there is any support for the idea in other Clubs sailing this size of boat? If not, maybe someone with informed/Official views on the subject would state, through MYN, the case for the R-36-R as it now stands. Sincerely, EEE EIIEEISIE ESSE SEESEEEEEEERel e UU a yaIEnEI ee So far we have no official information from the Fleetwood Club for intending visitors to the Championships in July, For the benefit of entrants from abroad M.Y.N. would like to warn them that in the U.K. luffs of mainsails that are bent on the masts and which therefore have been cut to suit will be measured! Futher details will no doubt be given in the notice to entrants. Check your sails before travelling! Secondly, if you are having trouble with booking a hotel for the Saturday night of the prizegiving you’re not the only one! The local hotels appear to be refusing a single night booking. I suggest contact with OOD Derek Priestley who lives in the town itself for advice. Address:~ 73 Milton Street, Fleetwood, Lancs. rs 39 Mode ; 33 Yorke a Yachting fesc2″29¢ News Tel: (07372) 49365 We are now able to offer working plans and hulls in C.R.P. to build a seale Jet Services. The model is 5*t long overall, and uses two channel radio, with two servos for the rudders linked by a wiring loop, and a standard winch. Apart from its use as a scale hull, the GRP shells can be used to form / a trimaran centre hull or even a proa. Ideal size for a good practical radio multihull! Prices 1 Hull / £15.00 £12.50 Set of plans Postage and packing by arrangement. = ass JET SERVICES ~~ J.D. HENNINGHAM clubman Not having “light engineering” Although a fabulous kicker Assuming tack is fixed, facilities I was amazed by the boom on P.18, MYN21. it achieves very little in sail control overall, any additional force is dissipated in a resultant the hook line re-adjusts itself, force aa foot flow cannot be achieved, E gh For a copper real “kitchen table” tube material boom end (annealed) jig during soldering. for total took half Build around an control, hour for the following made two. suitable twist drill Drill all from holes 4″¢ together, for fit and to avoid damage. o s E B A Ba z w s H i e r EPA COPRUINE -, : Practical min. drilling distance at 5mm c/s. Used as shown at very tidy, © Lhe USZEF lef (c), Steps at 1.7mm c/s slip off end and reverse, not as instant as some methods but safe and fabulous for jib where slack foot and tight leech are required. MAINSAIL TACK I have fortuitously a piece of brass tube that will pass 14 and this will pass knotted dacron swg wire behind my mast line and gives really excellent luff tension, is readily adjusted and totally repeatable, essential to serious which tuning. y Kats AT (Ou ps ; & 2!/ Wkines 9°88 D mun skeae S/) wn” Will : Mik OME not 3-3 Ur Steps slip Repeatable Instant Tray and *EXSIVG PYUT action so this with cold fingers on a bowsie! || I.M.Y.R.U. FIXTURES – 1986/7 EVENT CLASS PLACE HOST CLUB Mar 29/31 England Fleetwood Fleetwood MYC 28/31 S. Africa Apl 27/30 Spain May 3/5 England Durban Las Palmas Fleetwood National Championships M & 10r Durban MYC RM & R10r Gran Canaria Trophy CMN Guaires Leeds & B’ford MYC National Championship M Malmoya, Oslo Tavira, Algarve VVV-pokalen Norsk MSF CN Pedras D’El Rei 3rd Int. Trophy COUNTRY DATE 1986 29/30 New Zealand Wellington 10/11 Belgium S. Africa 18 18/19 Norway 31/1 Portugal Wellington MYC KMYC Antwerp Verwoedburg Stad Pretoria MBC Waimairi MYC 31/1 New Zealand Christchurch MZVS Spaarnwoude Jun 14/15 Holland Haderslev Yderdam DMV 21/22 Denmark National Championship RM National Championship RM Int. Friendship Regatta RM R10r 9-hour S.I. Championship Mill Lake Trophy 10th Anniversary 28/29 28/29 Jul 1/2 4/6 England Norway Canada Canada Gosport Malmoya, Oslo Vancouver Vancouver Gosport MYC Norsk MSF Vancouver MYC Vancouver MYC National Championship Midsummer Race National Championship National Championship Aug 3/9 11/17 16/17 Sep 6/7 20/21 England Spain Norway England Holland Gosport Tenerife Malmoya, Oslo Chelmsford Spaarnwoude Gosport MYC CMN Tenerife Norsk MSF Chelmsford RYC MZVS National National National National National 12/19 England Oct 4/5 4/12 Portugal S,. Africa Fleetwood Cascais Dec 6/8 Spain CN de Cascais Verwoedburg Stad Pretoria MBC 25/26 New Zealand Christchurch 25/26 Hong Kong Fleetwood MYC Seville Waimairi MYC RM RM RM RM RM R10r BM R10r RM WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP RM Cascais Int. Trophy RM Seears Rose Bowl RM Iberia Regatta RM Championship Championships Championship Championship Championship A RM & R10r RM RA RM National Championships RM & R10r Hong Kong MYA Hong Kong Championship RM CMN Sotavento 27/29 Australia 30/31 Australia Gold Coast Gold Coast Queensland MBC Queensland MBC National Championship EC12 National Championship RA 8/11 Australia Gold Coast Queensland MBC WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP oa 2/4 Australia Gold Coast Apl 18/19 New Zealand Christchurch Queensland MBC Waimairi MYC 42. National Championships RM & R10r EC12 National Championship RM nt _ —_= ae ee THE OLD MALTINGS QUAY OLIVER YACHT DESIGNER ANDO J. BOAT LEE BURNHAM ONON CROUCH ESSEX CMO 8AS ENGLAND BUILDER MALDON (0621) 782305 ferrule MAINSAIL TACK a # strap” THE VERY LATEST IN RMs.. DESIGNED, MANUFACTURED AND MARKETED BY OLTVMR LAM YACHTS, THE TRACER IS A DIRECT DESCENDENT OF THE WORLD FAMOUS TRAPPER WHICH POR THM PAST BIGHT YEARS HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AS ONE OF THE MOST RELIABLE AND COMPETATIVE RMa, ON THM MARKWT. OLIVER LEE QUALITY GLASS FIBRE HULL AND DECK. GRAHAM BANTOCK SATLS, ANODISHD ALLOY GROOVY SPARS. TRACER IS AVAILABLE AS A KIT OR CUSTOM BUILT TO ANY DMSTRWD STAGH OF COMPLETION KIT PRICE, INCLUDING LBAD KEEL AND SAILS £153.00. SEND S.A,.M, NOW TO OLTVER LEP YACHTS FOR COMPLETE SPRCTFICATION, LEAFLET AND PRICE LISTS. 43 0 ld er ROBERT J SMITH LETCESTERSHIRE, mI 3B ALSTON DRIVE, Dacht Fittings bd LOUGHBOROUGH, TEL. (0509) 227792 AFTER Spm HIGH QUALITY PRECISION FITTINGS FRE] ————FosrTaAace SPLEASE NOTE: WE HAVE BOGM PLEASE STATE WE REQUIRE THE SIZE AND FACKInNG OF YOU ARE USING.ALSO MAST INSERTS FOR 3/8″,1/2″ ALLOY & 10mm CARBON. IF YOU REGUIRE MAIN OR JIB BOOM,WHEN ORDERING THE HI-TECH GOOSENECK/KICKING %2 STANDARD GOCSENECK/KICKING STRAP 1/72″,5/8″ & 12.7 groovy HI-TECH JIB TRACK WITH FITTINGS (S0Omm tong) HI-TECH JIB TRACK WITH FITTINGS (250mm long) ALLOY BOOM KIT 3/8″ & 1/2″ (18″long) CARBON FIBRE BOOM KIT iGmm (500mm long) (soon) EYEBCLT KICKING STRAP BALL JOINT KICKING STRAP BALL JOINT INSERT to fit 3/8″,1/2″ alloy or 10mm booms STAINLESS JOINING ROD WITH NUTS CHROMED RIGGING SCREN with evebolt end …-ceeeseeeeeeeees VERTICAL- DECK PULLEY (slots into deck) CHROMED SWIVEL PULLEY (OUT OF STOCK TILL JULY? 10 11 12 13 14 CHROMED EYEROLT 15 CHROMED EYEROLT 1/2″ 4″ eee BOOM SIZE. BOOM KITS. &1 #5 *5 STRAP SF 1/2″.5/8″,12.7,14.5,GROOVY LONG LONG 16 3/8″ BOOM TUBE ae £10.5¢C EACH £5.50 £8.00 £7.00 £2.85 = £1.80 £3.50 £2.50 £0.75 £1.45 £2.30 £1.50 EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH £0.35 EACH £0.40 EACH £9.80 EACH 17 18 19 20 CHROMED BOCM/MA’ S with eye for 3/8″,2/2″ & 5/8″ TUBE. CHROMED BOGM/MAST BANDS with 1.5mm hele for kicking strap CHROMED CUTHAUL FITTING FOR GROCVY BOOMS CLEW ADJUSTER (fits 3/8″ or i0mm boom) 32 34 35 36 EACH EACH EACH £1.00 10m SUPER DACRON back stay, jib hoist etc £1.00 10m DACRON LINE sheeting etc BURGEES alec is no longer making them,we hope to have them in stock soon BRASS FERRULES — PACK OF SO £0.75 EACH 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 SHEETING ADJUSTER (fits 3/8″ertOmm baom) MAST SLIDE 1/2″,5/8″,12.7 & 14.5 groovy MAST STEP ALUM ALLOY (to step mast through the deck) SHROUD SPREADER KIT for all masts BACKSTAY SPREADER for groovy masts BACKSTAY SPREADER for round masts TELESCCPIC FAIRLEAD with eyvebolt RUDDER TUBE AND SHAFT WITH TILLER ARM state length (OUT GF STOCK TILL JULY) TILLER ARM STANDARD TILLER ARM TEE TYFE MAST JOINER 22 gauge (7/146″tube) MAST JOINER 20 gauge 37 FLAT 3-HOLE BOWSIES -— PACK OF 14 38 TRANSMITTER COVER size approx 18″ by 14″ 39 REGATTA COURSE CARD WITH PENCIL 40 BUMPER CORK 6″x2″. S/S”thick. 41 RUBBER GROMMETS FOR 3/8″ & iGmm BOOMS spreaders etc STAINLESS ROD 42 3mm rudder shafts etc STAINLESS ROD 4= 4mm 44 5/16″ ALLOY TUBE (slides inside 3/8″ boom tube) ALLOY TUBE (backstay spreader) 45 1/4″ 45 3/16″ ALLOY TUBE (mast spreaders) 3/8″ LONG CHROME PLATED SCREWS with NUTS 47 424 CHROME PLATED NUTS 49 4BA , HSS DRILL fer backstay spreader 49 1/4″ HSS DRILL for drilling mast to fit spreaders SO 3mm S1 1.5mm HSS DRILL for hock holes in masts and booms WE WILL TRY TO MAINTAIN THE ABOVE PRICES.ATHOUGH SOME MAY RISE IF OUR MATERIAL COSTS INCREASE. £1.00 £1.00 £9.50 £0.35 £0.35 £2.50 £0.80 £1.50 £1.00 £0.50 £1.80 £4.00 £1.00 £1.00 £0.50 £1.50 EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH £1.00 EACH £3.50 £0.56 £0.5¢C £0.60 £0.80 £1.00 £0.50 £6.50 £0.50 £0.40 £0.75 £1.2¢C £0.55 £9.60 EACH EACH EACH peri1O peri2″ pert2″ peri2″ peri2″ peri2″ perio perio EACH EACH EACH