Ooops - two questions:
Sail material “looks” to be the soft 3/4 oz. nylon ripstop spinnaker cloth?
Can’t read sail servo model? Does it have enough “ooomph” for stronger winds - or are you close to the limit of pull with the short servo arm?
Dang it - I’m so jealous of your weather - retirement can’t come soon enough.
Dick
I’ll take it 
Cheers,
Earl
No, it’s the 1/2 oz. Polycarbonate Coated Ripstop Polyester from Hang-em High.
It’s a Hitec HS-645MG. Handles the 450 sq in of Yankee III fine. so should do OK; but like I said, it’s a test bed.
Cheers,
Earl
Hi, Dick:
as you said:
“a one-time sail number assigned to the builder for all rigs, for all hulls. Thus, the hull number is registered, but the sail number is yours - regardless of the hull number”
the owner have a sail number for ever. Like IOM class.
maximo
Hi Dick,
same here in Germany, one personal sail number, and that’s it…we don’t register hull/construction numbers here…
regards
Cord
Earl, What are your first impressions of USA01 on the water?
I think, it’s not necessary to have such a strong (and heavy) servo. In Germany most often used is a GWS IQ-200 MG. It is small, lightweight and strong enough, if you make the servo arm not too long. Usually it is better to have a shorter arm (around 60mm) but more way. I use a computer transmitter and have set the servo way to approx 125%.
This works even in strong winds without problems. And we had strong winds last weekend …
Earl -
Sail number is yours - Congrats !
I not familiar with the IOM Class/method. For our multihulls, the sail numbers stay with the boat - each boat has a different sail number and that sail goes to new owner. Thus, only the name of the owner changes in our database …
Are you folks (Haegar, Cord & Maximo) saying the if an owner sells their boat, they retain the sails and number - or the new owner must remove the numbers?
I want to be sure, that Earl keeps the #1 sail number (specifically) to indicate his hard work and effort in getting the first US boat on the water. Should he decide to sell the hull, are you saying he keeps the sail number and the new owner is responsible to remove the number and replace with new assigned number - or does the boat WITH the #1 sail number go to the new owner?
Thanks - sorry I’m not understanding.
hi, Dick:
as you said, “Should he decide to sell the hull, he keeps the sail number and the new owner is responsible to remove the number and replace with new assigned number”
The number stay with the owner.
Earl will have the #1 for ever (until he want to), even he sell his boat.
If so, the new owner must get his own number and chage it in the sail.
sorry, my english is not so good.
Maximo –
you speak or write it very well. I know what you mean, and unless there is a huge out-cry, we’ll follow your suggestion.
Thank you for telling me how they do it in your country.
Dick
Hi,
in Germany the sailnumber stays with the owner. This is valid at least for the RG, the MM and the IOM. For IOM the hulls are numbered, too. Those numbers stay with the boat, of course. For MM and RG we have no hull numbers
In the UK, the MYA has a volunteer ‘Personal Sail Number’ registrar. Anyone sailing one of the recognised classes can apply for the issue of a ‘Personal Sail Number’. On payment of a registration fee, £10, then this number can be used for a set period, 5 years, after which the allocated number can be re-issued on payment of a further fee payment, or on failure to re-apply after a period of three months, then that number can be re-allocated to some other applicant.
This is a small yet good self perpetuating revenue stream for the MYA.
If number changes are needed on any sail, then it is an easy operation to peel off the stick on variety, having warmed the letter using a hair drier, or to clean off the ‘Permanent’ inked in type using Methilated Spirit. Dont use ‘Surgical Spirit’ or Acetone. They may remove the frosted finish.
In the IOM class, each hull has an allocated ‘Hull Number’ which cannot be changed when the boat changes ownership, but can be changed to a new number if the hull is sold abroad to another registration area, This number is allocated by the ‘Class Registrar’ prior to 'Fundimental Measurement, and is finalised when the completed ‘Measurement’ forms are signed and submitted by the ‘Official Measurer’ If a hull number has been issued but the hull to which the number has been allocated does not reach the stage of being measured, then, after a certain period of time, the hull number will be allocated to another applicant.
An allocated ‘Hull Number’ come free of charge.
The above registration system is easily operated over the telephone or by email.
Information on who to call is available on the MYA wedsite.
Cheers
Ralph
Ralph -
thanks for your response, and to all others too. I had an email off to Chris Jackson, but suppose he is more than busy with his editorial duties.
This information goes well with the current thoughts to keep sail number “attached” to the owner. Buyers of used boats will have to make the numerical change - or request a leading digit to add if they aren’t a “hobbyist”.
Ralph - your information on sail numbers answers other questions I hadn’t yet posted - namely how to remove the “inked” version of numbers. I have used the heat method for the sails on my big boat so was familiar with that method. Only concern was a buyer of a used boat/sails would wind up “melting” his sails trying to remove previous number set with some potent chemicals. Your suggestions will be passed along. Thanks so much.
The registration form is now available on the (US) RG-65 web site for those wanting to begin registering boats. As noted, only name and state and sail number will be made public. All other data will remain confidential and only used where/when necessary. That way, folks can see who has a boat in their area in case they want to make contact. it will be up to each owner to decide if they want to publicize their contact info.
Also - for the near future, I’ll also register Canadian boats and once there is a class secretary, I’ll spin the info off to that person, so once there is a true Canada Class at least there will be a record of numbers and owners.
My epoxy is curing at the moment, so I will need to return to my two of four that are under construction. Thank you everyone. Hoping this is a class that will draw some interest.
I’m quite satisfied with the boat. Here’s a summary of lessons learned so far:
Design:
This is sort of 1 1/2 generation boat, using hulls made by Nigel Heron for the free sailing student boat described at:
http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/showthread.php?t=3953
This boat was designed with a balanced hull for straight tracking under varying angles of heel. A looong discussion of hull balance can be found at:
http://www.rcsailing.net/forum1/showthread.php?t=3436
The advantage of hull balance in a R/C model, especially when sailed by a duffer like me, is that the boat won’t suddenly dive and veer when hit by a puff or a gust – which in my case always seems to happen when I’m looking away from the boat to see where the mark is It involves a performance penalty because balanced hulls typically have somewhat narrower transoms than unbalanced ones, which inhibits planing/surfing ability on the runs. It should be noticed, however, that the really wide-transomed ocean racers (like the mini transats) were designed to plane on long reaching legs which don’t usually happen in our kind of racing. IACC boats are better things to study, being designed for windward/leeward racing, although as with all classes you have to be careful of distortions introduced by the rating rules.
The original hulls are 30 inches long, with overhangs. Conversion to an RG65 involves cutting off the fore and aft overhangs and pinching the bow in a bit. This is the same approach the great British designer Henry Tucker used in his famous “Duck” M boats. The blunt bow above the waterline means you have to be careful about diving on the run, for which see below.
Narrowing the bow upsets the theoretical balance a bit but doesn’t seem to have any practical effect, as she keeps her head up even when heeled rail down.
The other problem with a fixed LOA class is diving under the run. Balanced hulls are inherently better in this regard because the balancing process in design moves buoyancy forward of the longitudinal center of floatation, the point the hull rotates around when pitching. Another thing that helps is concentrating weight around the center of buoyancy to reduce the tendency to “hobby horse”. Hence the tandem servo arrangement and the batteries on either side of the keel box. All this seems to have worked just fine and she has shown no diving tendencies so far.
Construction
Construction is conventional, and the 1000 gram displacement/500 gram ballast targets were met easily, even with heavy servos and alkaline batteries. The big lesson was how handy 3M 200 MP adhesive transer tapes are:
http://www.tapecase.com/c.108.1.1/200mp-high-performance.aspx
These comprise 2 mil thick 3M 468 pressure-sensitive adhesive on single-sided tape. Lay a strip on a piece of wood like an inwale, rub to set, peel off the paper and viola! a self-stick inwale. Set in place, rub, wait overnight and there you go. No goop, glop, or building up weight from excess adhesive or epoxy. Also good for tacking bulkheads in place, followed after setting up with a fillet of epoxy for the final joint. Anybody interested in lightweight construction needs to know about this stuff.
Biggest failure in construction was the use of a carbon fiber helicopter blade for a fin, which turned out to be way too flexible, so that has to be fixed. The jib radial also needs to be redone.
Cheers,
Earl
Hello Dick and others
Some comments on recent mails
I am retired and no longer Editor of Marine Modelling. after my last day of work on 31 January 08, I had to set up a new PC and email address, all others were work related and cancelled.
The English language copy of the RG65 rules I am using was a set supplied to me by Maximo Lange, and I have DELIBERATELY not amended a single word. This is to try to avoid different versions cropping up.
I did translate the plans of both JIF65 and the later round bilge hull boat JIF2 into English and both have been published by Marine Modelling magazine. The JIF65 is downloadable free off the MMI website (link www.traplet.com) and both are on sale in paper format.
We ( Marine Modelling) changed the name of JIF2, designed by Maximo Lange, to Puma to avoid confusion among general public customers, and in honour of the Argentine Rugby team. I had two Pumas built to test the plans and am the owner of one, the other is being sailing in a club with a fleet of UK designed Fiestas.
The personal number system run by the MYA is limited to one person for each number between 00 and 99, and is intended to help keen builders who want to swap rigs from one hull to another in the IOM class, or for dual registered Marblehead and Tenrater boats.All UK HULLS still require an indivudual number which follows them up to the point they retire or are scrapped.
6 My new email is chris.jackson43@btinternet.com
Chris, how does the Puma compare with the Fiesta, which I think I remember your saying had raced together? Looking at the specs, they’re very similar in sail area and LOA with the biggest difference being the weight, which is about 50% more on the Fiesta.
Hey Chris - thanks for the response, and congrats on retirment (I hope) ! I have about 3-4 years left before I can do that.
Appreciate your information. We (US RG65 Class) have moved ahead with registrations and sail numbers. As you pointed out, we have decided to asssign one sail number per person. We are “recommending” a builder doing more than one hull for himself, place a sticker inside hull with his last name, the hull number (series) and the month/year of build. It’s strictly optional for registration, but hopefully if we get more than one hull per owner/builder they will consider numbering hulls.
Have a good one.
Dick
Hi Martin
The Fiesta is in fact a RG65 and rates under the rule. The hull has a much higher volume coefficient and max beam is a lot higher. The sail area is about 15% less than the maximum allowed under the RG65 rule as it was conceived as a one design class with only a single rig to cover most wind strengths which is does very well.
The all up weight of a Fiesta is about 1.6kg with fin and ballast 0.77kg. The foils are similar to the Puma, being 2mm ali sheet. The radio is specified as standard servos and RX, and four AA cells on board battery. I have the same in my Puma.
The obvious comparison in design terms is a No Secret M class as compared to a Paradox, both Bantock Marblehead designs.
At present my Puma needs a second and third rig as it has less form resistance than the Fiesta and becomes overpressed much earlier. The slimmer hull and greater sail area give it better speed in light winds as you would expect.
I am only now beginning to pick up contact with people who previously expressed interest in the RG65 class, and some may well be building hulls. However the Fiesta is a well established fleet in the UK and I am not at all sure they would vote to convert their boats to the RG65 rules with the additional rigs which this implies!!
Chris, not that it’s very important, but the Fiesta sail area, according to their site, is 2228 sq. cm compared to the 2250 sq. cm max of the RG65 - less than 1% difference.