Doug-
I remember an earlier post of yours somewhare that described an Idea for a Catamaran with a canting keel.(Just thinking out loud) might solve some monohull problems like rudder and mast canting mechanism.
I think the trainer Idea is pretty cool.
I would consider “playing” in this class - but the concept of “input” seems to have gone out the window. Before I begin building, the basic specs need to be known. Before the specs are known, a decision has to be made.
If you really are looking for a glass hull/kit, the XL-25 is possible. See their add below for the class. It is 3 inches shorter than Doug’s requirement, and has 200 sq. inches of less sail area, but - if you start with an exisiting standard - and the only change made is to allow canting keels - what difference does it make? If you are all sailing the same boat, they are equal in speed - so you have a cheap entry level boat, modified to “TRAIN” to use canting keel, and the cost is very inviting. At $250 plus cost of one more winch for tilting the keel, and you have your trainer. All info is done, boat plans for home builders are available. Pre-made glass hulls are available.
[i]The XL-25 is a fast, easy to sail and competitive radio controlled model yacht.
The fleet of this class is growing fast because its smaller size. The yacht is ready to sail in only 1 minute!! also because of the unstayed carbon mast. [/i]
<font color=“brown”>The boat is simple to build yourself from balsa painted/impregnated with epoxy (all materials $US 50,-) or order the complete kit with glass-epoxy hull ($US 250,-) with building guide, drawings and all materials like; sails, bulb, fittings, glue etc.</font id=“brown”>
[i]The boat:
all-up weight 850 grams only,
40% of keel ballast !!
hull length is 70 cm
unstayed carbon mast (height 1 meter, 0.2 m2 sail area)
just need a 2- channel remote control and standard servo’s.
works 5 hours on 4xAA penlites, 4.8V system.[/i]
Sure it’s a semi-flat bottom, but that makes it a heck of a lot easier to fit the tilting keel mechanism. I have looked at the plans and the boat is simple to construct. Why hell, it even has a roating rig !!!
Sure would be fun to see a non-canting keel beat a canting keel too !
I guess my main question is simple - “WHY NOT?” Why do we have to reinvent everything just to have a “TRAINER”?
Roy, your invaluable contribution toward identifying problems is most welcome. Now maybe you could lend some of your expertise to coming up with the innovative solutions necessarry to make the concept work. I said in my original post that this would not be easy but the lack of easy answers should not discourage anyone. Thats why this is a group effort: to draw from the combined talents of many people to solve difficult problems.
John, the cat post is here somewhere but wouldn’t be a good answer for this boat.
I think innovative solutions can be found that will allow a Canting Keel trainer to be developed. Will and I are looking at solutions for the mechanism and others are welcome to join in; see the updated target parameters in the first post including the ideal target winch requirements.
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing
Dick, thanks for your suggestion but until we know more about the mechanism I’m not sure whether or not the boat would be a good one or not. I think the flat bottom (which I don’t like from a wetted surface standpoint) and the extreme light weight for the size would probably not provide the performance this boat needs to have. But as soon as we get a firm idea of what is required to make the keel work from a beam standpoint and weight standpoint I’ll post it here so you can decide if you want to proceed with a prototype or not.
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing
shame on you dick and shame on you doug…
everyone knows you can’t just stick a canting keel in any ol’ hull design.[:D] hullforms must be thoroughly tested and designed for such a superior technical system…or so i’ve learned from this site
cheers
Right, I’m in. I want to try building and sailing a canting model and this is small enough to be cheap. Im gonna build somthing of the same length as the tactic I discribed earlier so i have a benchmark. The hull will be balsa for starters, the rig will be stolen from somthing else for the moment. If it works I’ll make a propper rig for the thing and take a mould off the hull, and after that anyone who wants a hull can have one…
Sound fair?
Hull will most likely be of a boxy int-Moth-like type, as narrow as i can get away with…
Luff 'em & leave 'em.
Doug - what the hell are you talking about?[:-banghead]
<font size=“2”>NOW</font id=“size2”> we need to design the canting system <u>FIRST</u> - <u>BEFORE</u> we can chose a boat size? How come <u>YOU</u> know the boat size already?[:-banghead]
Did you (very secretly like your other ideas) build one of these already and you just don’t want to give up and have to start over? Just for your insistence, I think the rest of us should <u>DEMAND</u> we <u>Don’t</u> use your specs! How ya like that?
What is going on? You take a one design that exists, you allow a canting keel, and everyone does their best to come up with a keel mechanisim that works ! Rather simple concept that we are all playing with the same starting “one design”! Ever heard of a Cub Scout Pinewood Derby car? Here’s a box of materials - everyone gets the same thing. Now go make a car, bring it back and race it. Next year, if you really screwed up, make a different one. If you didn’t screw up, then race it again and defend your “crown”!
I just can’t understand why YOU think <u>WE ALL</u> need to analyze this thing.
<font color=“teal”><font size=“3”>ONE MORE TIME… IT’S A FRIGGIN’ TRAINER SO WE ALL LEARN HOW TO CONTROL THE BOAT AND LEARN TO SAIL IT !</font id=“size3”></font id=“teal”>
If we all have the same boat - WHY do we need to analyze the process. Isn’t that what you were proposing in the first place? A cheap, easy to build (or BUY) trainer so people don’t have to spend money on an expensive boat only to find out they don’t like the process, but if they do, they know their ideas work.
WHY are you worrying about surface area? They are all the same!
Why are you worrying about length? They are all the same!
Why are you worrying about sail area? They are all the same!
It’s a ONE DESIGN that simply allows canting keels! Just what you’ve been whining about for three years. <u>SO</u> here is a class, and a ONE DESIGN class at that, with just enough latitude to allow the owner to insert a canting keel and go sailing.
Geezus Man - you are NOT using this to race against one of your hypothetical MAXZ86 creations. It isn’t going to be raced against a Marblehead, US1M or ODOM. It’s a ONE DESIGN THAT HAS A CANTING KEEL ALLOWANCE! Why do you think you need to analyze something that is this simple - and why worry about issues that are all one-design?
You once said (I think) you used to sail Big Lasers - now how in the heck did THAT ever happen? They are too small. They are too heavy. They have two little sail area. They have poor sail controls. they have flat bottoms. They have a cheap-ass line traveller. They didn’t have foils, spinnakers, canting keels - either. You talked about buying a Hobie 17 for a while. Even that boat has more “tweaks” available than the “TRAINER” we are talking about.
No wonder no boats are being produced - you need to analyze everything so nothing happens until the “study” is over. I can just imagine you being invited to sail an Opti !!! Boy would that be a laugh. Can’t sail cause the hull is too flat; no jib, no spinnaker, etc. etc.
Come on - is this a trainer or not? Or- as I suggested earlier, are you really trying to turn this into a mini-F100?
If this “concept” can’t be agreed upon by - oh, say mid February - I’m otta’ here cause nothing will EVER get done.
Just DO SOMETHING !
Come on Dick, nobody is holding you back. Go ahead with your idea(the flat bottom boat)-Matt’s going forward with his. It would be great to see your boat and if you’re right maybe we’ll all do it your way-don’t be hesitant – take the lead- sounds like you have it all figured out so please, go for it! If you have any questions first read the original post where there are general suggestions and some target ideas then ask me; I’ll help in any way I can. You can also disregard them and do it your way-thats what this is all about -lets see some idea’s on the water…
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing
So - let me get this straight. Heaven knows I don’t want to appear “ignorant” by not understanding (all) your posts.
If Matt is building to one spec, and I build to another, and Doug to another - what class (exactly) are we all building to?
Doug’s Quote: “I’ll help in any way I can.”
Let’s start here:
Is this - or is this not, a one design class?
more questions to follow, just answer the easy ones first!
[:-banghead]Would it not be simpler to forget about a new CLASS ( for the moment)and just design and build a boat each to his own concepts.
Then, when and if, they each work to there designed parameters some decisions can be made based on what actually works instead of all this waffle and bullshit![:-censored]
Do it NOW before it`s too late.
Please refer to the first post for additional points that must be considered when doing a canting keel boat-posted tonight
The class is designed to be a strict one design; as far as I know Matt is now and I am(in a couple of months) going to build to the target dimensions in the first post but at this point the idea is to explore other concepts as well. Since we do not yet know whether the target dimensions can be done cost effectively any ideas that work are acceptable now . I'm going to test an idea with an old 24 " hull I have almost immediately and Will and I are still working on finding a suitable off the shelf or easily modified winch for the target dimensioned boat .
But I urge you or anyone to try any idea that they think may fit the bill.Those that build a test boat as part of the development of this concept will have a strong voice in the final design of the boat.
After the various ideas have been tried we’ll evaluate where we are and determine what works best within the framework of producing a Canting Keel Trainer at reasonable cost.
So by all means build your boat! It would be a big help and add immensely to the evaluation of the best way to proceed in building a strict one design class.
Dick,could the Xl25or?(flat bottomed boat) be scaled up to 30"?
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing
According to my proportional calculator, 112 percent increase at the copier when printing the plans would put it mighty close to 30 inches.
This “one design” problem has gone on for far to long now. I’ll now make it simple. Like the 18’ skiffs that sail all over the world they are one design and there rules are very simple. 18 foot long 20 foot wide and the racers start at 11:00 am on saturday(here in Australia at least). So as for this “one design” lets make them 30 inches long, maximum sail area of .7sm (not sure what that is in inches) and the racing starts at the descretion of the club you sail with.
Ok guys there you go have fun building this new “one design” class.
i take it that your laughing with this idea greg
Greg - being familiar with the Victor Products line of boats - Tahoe and several IL Moro’s later, the plastic hulls “might” not handle the stress - but then again, we could “debate and discuss” THAT forever as well.
I am willing to take a look at the Blackhawk 32 as a possible “trainer” alternative too.
http://www.victor-model.com/blackhawk32.html
Cost really leaves a lot in a $500 budget to spend on canting gear. Again, if we can easily/quickly decide on some basic specs so at least the boats will be “somewhat” equal on the water, I think my idea for a canting keel might work on this boat as well.
I see three areas of needed agreement …
-
length, and if we are all talking 30 inches +/- 3" that should provide a level playing field for reasonable on-water comparisons.
-
Sail area agreement needed. How about 500 sq. inches maximum TOTAL sail area. None of the measured triangular stuff. If you want to measure just the triangle and allow free roach area, then I propose 350-400 area maximum.
-
Limit radio to three channel maximum.
Let all the rest (mast height, weight, angle of cant, multiple boards or rudders) all go where they desire.
Anyone NOT AGREE ------- Doug ???
We don’t want you coming back later with the excuse your boat wasn’t built to the same specs as the rest - so there fore it can’t be competitive.
Ummm - speaking of $500 costs …
The Toronto guys allow any boat to be purchased by a competitor who has sailed in a minimum of 50% of the races for a specified amount at the end of the season - less Radio and receiver - but servos/winches stay.
By allowing a “claim” to be made at the end of the year, the $500 cost limit would prevent runaway costs for the internals - again - keeping the concept of this as a “TRAINER”.
That way, limited budgets can compete with Doug’s boats that he will try to sell for $1000 or more (possibly). Just save your receipts, in case of protest, and be ready to sell your boat for $500 to a racing competitor at season end - or maybe allow a two season use of the boat. If you don’t sell it <font color=“red”>if it is claimed </font id=“red”>- you don’t get to race it - and it can’t be claimed by anyone off the street - only another “TRAINER” owner. <font color=“red”>Can be sold outright at any time to a new buyer.</font id=“red”>
<font color=“red”>Update/Edit in red - added</font id=“red”>
There are thre or four people tha say they will or actually working on various aspects of makin thisboat a reality. Will isworking on solving the winch problem and has designed neat mchanics package with a 55 degree cant angle. I am working on the actual canting keel installation in the boat to simplify it from the F100 system and am soon going to test it in a 24" boat. Dick has seemed to indicate he is going to build a boat and Natt is going to build a boat.
We will gather information from all of this and draw up a final set of One Design specs for the boat.
There are serious problems when consideringadding a canting keel to an existing model: 1) the canting keel allows the displacement to be substantially reduced and some boats won’t perform well at te lower displacement. Alternatively if displacement is kept the same more sail area can be added but that may be too much for the original hull design.
These are just considerations that must be understood and don’t necessarily rule out any boat.
If Greg wants to experiment with the Victor 32 once we have a winch and installation system nailed Will and I could probably help him try that boat using a version of the final system.Just as I’m helping Matt try his idea or Dick or anyone.
But in the end we’ll make a decision on a final boat-a strict one design that offers the best solution to the problem.
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing
Greg,
I like the idea of using the victor hull. As far as the hull taking the stress goes, the bulkhead that holds the keel canting mechnism would transfer the loads into the hull in a very spread out way, so I don’t think that would be a problem.
I’d have to see what the keel tab looks like to see if the existing keel on that boat could be easily adapted to a canting keel system. If so, you could use that keel and just design a canting mechanism that the keel plugs into.
Here is my whacky idea for the day. I came up with this for my US1M canting rudder, but it could work here as well (you guys are going to love this):
The canting keel mechanism would consist of a pivot axle that would have the keel trunk inserted in it. Out of the top of the mechanism would be the canting arm which is a rod that the canting servo can push on. The ends of the axle are secured to the bottom of the hull with simple moulded caps or straps.
Now here is my whacky idea: instead of trying to design some watertight seal around the axle so that it can rotate and not let water in, simply cover the whole mechanism with a flexible boot (similar to the boot that covers the universal joints in a front wheel drive car). So by now you are probably asking where would we find such a boot that is the right size for this application. I have an answer… BABY BOTTLE NIPPLES! The top of the nipple can be cut open and sealed to the canting arm and then you glue the big round base over the rest of the canting mechanism and you are done, sealed and ready to sail!
What do you think?
- Will
Will Gorgen
A rubber baby bottle nipple is too stiff to allow easy and unobstucted movement of you keel substructure. I have had my ideas analyzed by no less than four people who know nothing about canting keels, and I am following their advice. Since the rubber nipple is so stiff, it will create a need for even more power to “bend” it from it’s normal form. Thus, I am using a recommendation that a condom be used instead.[:D] They are much lighter, more flexible, a bit more spendy, but you can get them lubricated, or ribbed, and spares can be carried in your wallet in case of an accidental puncture!
Greg - under separate email, I will do a sketch and email to you about my idea for moveable keel ballast. Perhaps it can be retro-fitted to the Blackhawk without a lot of modifications. Could be controlled by two different kinds of servo/winches. Again - just ideas. Look when they get there and email me back with comments. Need to do a better sketch and scan first. Maybe early next week - or over weekend if time at this end permits.
By the way, if the idea for the keel works, the word “TROJAN” and “HORSE” are already trademarked for the canting keel design, and will be solely licensed for use by “me”.
Cheers
I have reservations about using an existing hull like the Blackhawk. I don’t think the boat that becomes the CK Trainer should exceed 30"-there has to be a limit and it seemed the concensus was 30". I couldn’t find what the design ballast is but did find an all up displacement of 5.5 pounds which would either(probably) require the boat to sail at substantialy less weight or at the same displacement with more sail area- neither is a real good idea. Does anyone know the ballast bulb weight on that boat?
I don’t think a 6" beam on a 32" boat is going to lead to a high performance boat and if attention is not paid to performance-carefull attention then I think the result would just be a gimmick boat. It is essential ,in my opinion ,that this boat be able to not only move the keel but also perform better than boats its size.
A boat not designed for a canting keel is not likely to perform to a level necessary to show that a canting keel really works from a performance standpoint because of the design advantages that starting from scratch offers when considering a canting system. But I think the V32/Blackhawk should be tested…
Several full size boats use a rubber seal to make a canting instalation work; sounds like that might work fine. I’m working on a method that is similar but uses a very flexible rubber to complete the seal and a trunk that pivots allowing the keel to be easily removed.The F100 system works pefectly but is too expensive for this boat.
I think the target dimensions should be held as closely as possible and that sail area means max sail area.
Of the already existing designs it seems like a scaled up Xl125 is very interesting since it is a very light displacement boat.But wetted surface may be a problem…
Doug Lord
–High Technology Sailing/Racing