Yes, it all works, sort of.:shoot:
I will now make some modifications based on todays trial.
As I suspected the pull on the central course length string was bent by the starboard marker as it triangulated the pressure. (I think that is the correct term?)
I will also shorten the depth, although as you can see in the photos my friend Noel had his IOM there and we both tried sailing the internet course and recorded the same time. 3min 06sec. This course is only for FOOTYs and so can be around 300mm deep which would be a lot easier to transport and setup. :headphone
Getting the windage of the two leeward buoys right is one of the secrets of a workable design and needs some experimentation for your wind strengths.
So a little more development to be done before I am really happy.:trouble:
Hi Ian,
Congrats on the trial.
How do you think the course will perform with tidal influence.Will the course be influenced more by what is happening under the surface than by the wind above the surface?(even when the wind is stronger than the tide)
Is the course slower to react to wind shifts?
Is it possible that the course could spend long periods of time not aligned with the wind at all in certain conditions hence possibly making a nice beam reaching course for a fast racing time?
Good points to this type of design are also clear though,both sides of the course are useable,and the course is always the correct length.
Yes, you can make other assumptions on the basis that it will work.
Others may help to refine the design for their particular circumstances, but the basic idea of getting the connections below the surface is not difficult to achieve.
The challenge comes with the start line concept and its orientation.:devil3:
I have not changed my opinion that fleet racing against others over the internet is not an activity I favour.
Happy to do the individual runs and in fact did two timed runs today.
8min & 7min 40sec.
Plus the IOM run of 3.06 which was just an experiment.:rolleyes:
Yes Noel and I were talking today about having ajustable wind vanes to allow some steering Angus, so no, not too frou - frou.:zbeer:
Brett, the course should react about the same as the surface model with the tide influence.
Yes it was a little slower to react to wind changes mainly because of its mass I think. When I chop it down it will be lighter and faster to react.
It was good to not have the restriction of that centre barrier. Still didn`t make me any faster though.
Incidentally, I agree that straight fleet racing over the Internet is a nonsense. However, competitions between fleets should be within certain limits.
If you send me an email address to translate@enterprise.net, I’ll send you my formal thoughts so far and you may see more clarly what I’m up to.
Hi Graham,
If I am reading your post correctly you are suggesting a downwind start?
I don’t think you would want to see a fleet of footys having a downwind start on a 50 foot course:)
Argh… my terrible mistake… everywhere I typed ‘windward’ I meant ‘leeward’. Let me copy and correct that here…
Now that the course length line is below keel depth, could the start line bouys not be positioned one on either side of the centre line?
The start line could be set 4mtr (one tube length) forward of the leeward (downwind) mark and constructed using a + shaped joint at that point. The start line being constructed from tubing with half of it’s length either side of the centre. The leeward mark would then sit 4mtr further to leeward giving clearance for a fairly uninhibited start.
This way the leeward mark/start line system would be in balance and not drag the course out of line. In effect it would be a floating triangle with a windsail mark to leeward and two narrower ‘noodles’ marking either end of the start line.
… the start would be into wind from the leeward end of the course, as preferred.
Hi Graham,
That sounds better.
BUT…I am worried that all this talk of fleet racing on the Internet course could be taking us in the wrong direction.
I am yet to be convinced of the value of fleet racing in this way,as is Ian.
Before we are taken to task on this be aware that Ian and myself are some of the very few who have actually used the Internet course,so we have most likely a better understanding of the pro’s and cons.I would like to hear the opinions of others who have used the Internet course.
My mind is open to suggestions though as the goal of racing in this way is worthy.
A real point of concern for me is bad air on the race course.It is well known that in yacht racing in big fleets there is lots of disturbed wind behind the boats in front,this has the effect that as the race goes on the boats in front are able to move away from the others ,this effect gets worse as the bad air reaches the tail enders.The bigger the fleet the worse this is.
A simple case of the rich getting richer and the poor poorer.
It has been proposed that the Internet fleet racing be scored on the average time from each fleet.Taking into account the bad air as mentioned above it is clear to see that the smaller fleets will be able to acheive better average times(less disturbed wind).And in fact when winning these fleet races becomes important to some they will race in the smallest allowable fleet(least ammount of disturbed wind on the course) to help acheive a better average time.
One possible way around this is to have a narrow band of allowable fleet sizes.
anyone have a widely different view than this?
There are a number of well proven points systems (e.g. RORC, ISORA …) that place a heavy loading on the winner which inceases the bigger the fleet.
I have been trying to keep things very simple because people get put off/confused by complex mathematics and the name of the game is not too serious fun. However, such techniques could be used taking the elapsed time as the position. The actual arithmetic complexity is irrelevant: computers are quite good at doing sums.
Any such approach should be treated with great caution. The RORC PF system was incomprehensible to most and badly tested: it was scrapped after a year and TCF (i.e. straight time on time) handicapping reintroduced. The various weather-based variable handicapping systems esposed for a bit by the CCA, NAYRU and various manifestations of the IMS probably worked fairly in terms of the results but were intensely unpopular. As far as I know, North America has reverted to its traditional time on distance systems.
In my view we should accept Internet fleet racing for what it is: a piece of fun that allows us to look beyond our own pond. At the moment the problem is not one of big or small fleets but of ANY fleets. As fleets grow and become more numerous, its relevance will probably decline. In the mean time it will serve our ends.
If this is not what what you want, the mathematics to achieve any sort of result you like can be developed and implemented as software. However, given the absence of any significant historic database of Footy racing, there is a very high probability of anomalies.
Anyway, what’s wrong with an enthusiastic club with a lot of boats entering a lot of small fleets? Every sport has strategic wrinkles of this kind. That’s what makes winners winners!
Well this being the ‘construction’ thread I was concentrating only on offering a possible construction solution in my above post… I will wait to see if it is a good idea or not :rolleyes:
As to the rest Brett I have to agree with you about fleet racing and the internet course. My concern about it is quite pragmatic in that we do not want to be seen by others yacht racers as either ‘needing’ or ‘demanding’ a special course.
When we get right down to basics if we are to grow as a class then we need members of existing clubs to take to the Footy. Ok it’s Sunday morning and we arrive at the lake, either a typical triangular course with start line is already there or someone will be setting it for the day. Now unless there are enough Footy guys in the club to make a Footy only Sunday worthwhile we are going to have to work with what we have… a rather large course.
Hopefully we can drop an extra couple of bouys in to reduce the course size in some way… and that is probably the best we can hope for. Expecting to lay our special Footy internet course either instead of, or as well as the normal course will be asking alot. I find it unlikely that special Footy only clubs will spring up, that has not really been the way with other classes, so is it likely to start now?
So I see us having two strands to our racing… the internet course in some form for time trials and isolated internet skippers… and racing adapting the typical club course, probably a reduced triangle. Which is to be viewed as a positive thing I think. If we can make the internet scoring etc. work we will have something the other classes do not have. But we must be careful not to isolate ourselves from our bread and butter for growth… the clubs.
I say this as a veteran of racing marbleheads and IOM yachts with three different clubs of varying seriousness.
Well, here goes some of my dumb questions:confused: I can only assume that you took all this PVC conduit in pieces to the water; any concerns of it comming apart out there? When you deployed the course, did you have a boat to put it out there? Or did you just throw your anchor out from the shore and let it drift out? I’m sorry but I have more trouble with the logistics of getting the course in the water than building it or using it. Even with two running Footys (soon three), I can’t seem to generate enough interest in my friends to get both out at the same time, so I most likely will be setting this up myself.
Bob
Bob, there is no such thing as a dumb question mate. :sly:
I will try to answer so that every one will have a better understanding because I have been a little vague with details.
The course as I constructed it, comes in three pieces.The windward buoy with its associated vertical tube and the left and right (port & starboard ) halves of the start line leeward section.
The longest measurement of any bit is 2 metres, which fits in my vehicle OK.
As I noted elsewhere the depth measurement I used of 900mm is not necessary and infact makes it difficult to handle.
So I will be cutting it down to around 300mm
I also liked the idea of using a T or an + joint, as proposed by Graham, so that may be another modification.
The only unglued joint I had was between the port and starboard start marks where the two bits of 2 metre tube joined.
This was a push fit but I also inserted a 4x30mm stainless bolt for safety.
Making holes with a soldering iron is easy then just clean up with a hand held twist drill bit.
A number of holes were drilled to allow water to flood the tubes for negative buoyancy and subsequent drainage.
The windward and leeward elements of my course are attached with lightweight string, as with my earlier designed course.
I see no reason to change this as it works very well, is light, easily stored, ajustable and quick to set up using fishing tackle clips.
The whole arrangment once assembled is lowered into the water by hand from our launch pontoon and allowed to float away downwind.
That is where the windage comes in and is a very important part of any design.
Once the leeward parts start to get near their position I simply toss the windward buoy as far as possible, along with is associated anchour weight, whilst holding onto the heavier weight retrieval line, which is then made fast to the pontoon. That`s it, your done.
At this venue it would only work in one wind direction, but as that direction is our prevailing one it will work most times.
Any other questions from anyone just ask and you shall receive.
This is starting to sound very practical to me now Ian. I can see me making the submerged centre version with the balanced leeward bouy/startline I described (hopefully clearly) if that becomes an acceptable form. I may have to find a different venue though because it would not work at our Group lake in the common wind direction.
After a very good afternoon with the ‘Kittiwake 2CR’ development boat I am getting keen to find out just how she compares.
I think Graham’s post 2 back is very much to the point. You do not have to use an Internet course for all Footy racing. Locally you do not have to use it for ANY Footy racing. However it provides a mechanism by which comparisons can be made.
How do we use it? The tiime trial has proved a failure. Nobody has published an attempt for months. The fleet has the virtue of physically getting boats together - at existing clubs or elsewhere. International/national scoring adds a little extra fun and incentive.
A also agree that in places where sailing water is in short supply, coexistence of an Internet course and othwers may be a problem. It is an even bigger problem if it is for the sole benefit of Joe Bloggs doing a solo time trail.
And, as I said before, you do not have to use it all the time.
My version 4.2.1 of the “Internet Course” for your perusal.:magnify:
Photo 1 shows the new leeward end which now has two evenly spaced buoys two metres apart.
The draft has been reduced to 500mm which is enough for both the IOM and AC15 classes which we sail in our club (Wellington Radio Yacht Club.)
The unit comes apart for transport and the second photo shows the modified windward buoy from my original floating course along with the taken apart sections of the leeward unit.:smgreen:
For fleet racing the two start buoys could be used as a leeward gate where competitors sail between the marks and choose which way they wish to turn, left or right to sail back to windward.:splat:
Ian, for a man who’s unconvinced of the necessity, you’re doing a marvellous job. That is a lovely piece of minimalist enginerering! Have you tried it for stability yet?
Incidentally, thinking about the problem of the course shifting, there’s no great problem except at the start - the techniques change but the basic logic of a windshift is the same.
At the start, you just do what Olympic courses do on a major windshift before the start - postpone. But in this case, you don’t have to re-lay anything, just wait.
Ian
Good Job!!! Your refinements have made the couse very simple to understand and build. Couple of questions…How much anchor weight have you been using? What is the function of your blue block?
As I understand it, you need to be able to launch this from a place that will have an area downwind from you to sail in. I guess this could cause some people problems if they have limited access to the shoreline, but not insurmountable.
Again thanks for all your efforts:)
Bob
