I didn’t realize the Farr office have ever published the lines of Big Red. I’ve got some drawings about somewhere - but not the lines. She certainly would make a beautiful model. If you’ve got the lines, I’m jealous.
Reckon I might go for something a little more on the classical side - Infidel. I’ve always wanted to build her. She’s make a good subject and at this scale would be a very nice 62" or 1,574mm. (JohnB will know exactly what I mean - the rest of you go look up “Ragtime”).
Dick - I’m currently using 1.5.0.10 and have no problems with Yahoo groups -or if I do have, I’m probably too ignorant to recognize it (probably more likely).
I didn’t realise that the 1/10 Scaled Class would be as popular when I posted this thread, would it be worth our while to have the Thread moved over to the New Classes forum or leave it here??
Just thinking that the biggest Boat Review Thread is actually about a New Class??
On topic, it would seem we Aussies have taken to 1/10 Class, and it looks like Elliott’s, T-Boats and Farr’s are going to get a run down here in the Southern Hemisphere.
The Farr office? That place is heaven, I’ve been to the Annapolis office (don’t know if they have others) but I could stand there for hours looking at all their different half hulls.
Her original 1965 keel (in the classic Spencer style) could be almost to scale and still work fine on the model. Or I could cheat a little and use a semi scale version of her most recent keel (as Ragtime) which has a bulb.
A fitting tribute to John Spencer, given that 30 years after Infidel was built he was very involved in RC models.
…and to Tom Clark (as of course would Steinlager II). Come to think of it, Ceramco would make a smart model to this scale too - except the keel would need modification for RC model purposes.
“Big reds” and “Ceramcos” lines are reproduced in small scale in Bruce farrs book “The shape of speed”
Spencers lines to I think “Buccanner” are in the “Complete Book of boating”
by Bob Ross,also in small scale.
I’ve got Ceramco’s lines in A4 format, but the drawings are sufficiently clear such that they would blow-up adequatetly for modelling purposes. Wouldn’t do Buccaneer personally - though I have had the pleasure of being aboard her many many years ago.
I know most in this thread have been talking about 1/10 models of recent high - performance boats, but it could also be agreat idea for those interested in the older classics and modern classics (by which I mean, say, 1960s - early 1980s). There are some beautiful looking IOR examples that would make good subjects - particularly from the early days of that rule.
I know most in this thread have been talking about 1/10 models of recent high - performance boats, but it could also be agreat idea for those interested in the older classics and modern classics (by which I mean, say, 1960s - early 1980s). There are some beautiful looking IOR examples that would make good subjects - particularly from the early days of that rule.[/quote]
Muzza,
I mentioned earlier that within the 1/10 Scale Class there should be sub Classes.
[i]Also would it be too early to establish Classes within the Class to build, ie…Historical (J-boats, pre 1950 Boats) Retro (IOR Boats) and Modern (IMS, IRC etc…) Just thinking that this could be a cool way of developing the overall Class Genre.
HcW…[/i]
That Graupner model of “Rubin” would fit right in, you could possibly add such legendary boats as “Windward Passage” “Condor” or any of the “Kialoa’s”.
Personally, the sheer magnitude of choices is what I believe in the end will make this fledgling Class of ours a winner with a much broader base appeal that exists currently.
We might have to get Rolex to sponsor our Class soon what with all of the big boats looking to materialize.
[RIGHT] [/RIGHT]
Hopefully in one month I will have a 1/8 and 1/10 scale Columbia 30(32) hull built with either balsa or basswood planking. West system seal,outfit and sail both by sometime in july. Prototype and see if enough interest beckens tooling. DD
Yup John. He was involved in the IOM up 'till his death, and designed a few, including a hard chine IOM in the classic Spencer style.
I’ve always had a soft spot for him and his boats. The first boat I ever raced was a Spencer (the Flying Ant class). Sailed a Spencer Cherub for a while too - already obsoleted by the Farr Cherubs at that stage. Years later I seriously considered pulling the funds together for one of the Spencer 42 footers - the boat in question has since been lost. I was just a wee nipper when Infidel was launched and she made a big impression. A few years later I remember going up to Army Bay to watch Bucaneer sail past Whangaparaoa on her way back from Hobart ('71 I think).
I took a few nice shots of Ragtime a couple of years ago in L.A. They are around here somewhere.
I am going to try and keep this relatively vague as to not give away my design, but also with enough information that the question can be answered. I in the process of procuring a set of plans for an ORC boat, the same designer is also building an IRC boat of the same design, just molded to fit the IRC rules. Even if the ORC plans do not incorporate certain aspects (bow sprits) may I build them into my 1:10 scale boat under the IRC rule, with confirmation that an IRC design is out there, it does match the ORC design and the IRC boat will have a bow sprit? In short, will email confirmation from the designer, allow the placement of a bow sprit on the boat, even without plans for it? Thank you.
Sounds fine to me - it’s supposed to “resemble” a real boat with detail amount left to the builder/owner as I would think that if someone stood back and looked at the boat - it would be somewhat recognizable.
The fact that the real boat may have seven winches and yours has five would be rather pickey if this isn’t a concours type of class. I would think (my opinion) that if you build to the scale size, and it is based on a “real” boat - all else is optional as to what level of scale detail you want to pursue. I also think we would notexpect portholes to be transparent, nor does there need to be a nav station and galley if the cabin door is operational. We have already agreed that deck hardware can be static if not required to sail the boat, so a boat with or without bowsprit seems to be a non-issue in my book.
Hey, you can always say it was added for a specific event and then removed to comply with other offshore rules. Since you aare being a bit vague it might be possible like the ABN boats #1 and #2 - I would find it difficult to tell which was which in a quick view unless one was red and one was green ! In fact, I’m still trying o find out if mine needs one or two angled daggerboards. So there you go - if only the tops of the boards are above deck and they are NOT working board, does that disqualify a design? I would vote “NO”.
Just wanted to make sure, most likely it will be detachable, but will be there in case of a spinnaker system ever being utilized. As for VOR boat and their dagger boards. My thoughts are, if you would like, they can be attached for static display (either full length or just the length below the waterline) and when sailing a centered daggerboard can be attached/fitted in order to make mechanics of the boat a little easier without having to worry about raising and lowering the dagger boards.
Well it’s been decided. My 1:10 boat will be a One Design 40 aka Farr 40. Picked up all the drawings (hull, keel, rudder and deck) today so once my TP52 gets a little further along I will start it. It was too tough to get anyone to agree to pass over any of the GP42 lines.
Great design pick…however you will see that she is very narrow from the mast forward. I build half models of her and you may need some weight aft to keep her from nose diving. For what it’s worth…DD
[/RIGHT]
it might be possible like the ABN boats