Thoughts on the Battery Rule

Footy Class General Discussion (Footy)
21

It’s just a thought, but if the minimum weight limit is set higher than the weight of your boats, will you buy back all the ex-Footys from your customers?

That is sort of a joke, but what would happen to the old fleet?

We are not really an open class and were never intended to be a grand prix class. This is what the rules are about:
http://footy.rcsailing.net/mmi-Oct05.php
I haven’t a clue what the class will end up as, but I hope the words ‘cheep and simple’ could still be applied.

If light boats are grandfathered under a new rule, then having a stock of registered ultra-light Footys would be close to having a goldmine. I’m off to find my roll of carbon…

22

For all the fuss about lipo cells it is worth pointing out that they are in every cell phone that I know of, and every laptop that anyone would want to lug around and every quality hand held video game etc. They are already ubiquitous, but pretty much transparent to the user.

The problem with using them in hobby stuff is that the safety aspects are in the hands of the user, who had better be aware of proper handling. They must be charged with something designed to handle their particular requirements. (as indeed cell phones, computers and video games all are.)

Lipo’s are in plastic envelopes and are also a little more delicate than other sources of electric power, but they have the best power to weigh ratio of anything readily available. At least twice as good and maybe four times as good as the next best rechargeable type of cell.

Pete

23

I guess my choice of amounts probably was extreme but I have seen hulls available in those price ranges. But the point really isnt the cost. I admit I am not the most skilled builder out there. I have built three footies that I completed and a few I just gave up on and trashed. My best so far comes in at around 590 grams ready to sail. I guess the thing about racing is it would be nice to at least have a chance to win once in a while. The way I see it now ( and am probably wrong but its the way I see it ) is that a handfull of the more talented builders like Angus and Bill and a few others pretty much have a lock on the races they
compete in. When that happens alot of us prefer to sit it out and just sail for fun because we have no chance. If I have to compete against moonshadow Ill save myself the embaressment and just watch. I really do wish I had the talent but I have to do with what I was given. So Ill sail my heavy boats and dream.

24

From the US AMYA Class Description Page:

The Footy class is a Development class (Development classes are now termed Open classes as defined by ISAF Equipment Rules of Sailing) which provides lots of flexibility for builders, since anything not specifically prohibited or restricted by the class rules is legal. So the Footy is a perfect class for beginning and experienced boat designers alike. New ideas can be developed quickly and inexpensively.

A Footy class boat must fit in a box 12"L X 12"D X 6"W. Primary rig configuration is unlimited. Radio control is two channels only, and must be powered by 4 AA batteries. Several different hull designs have been developed, and Footys have been built with lateen rigs, gaff rigs, swing rigs, and genoa jibs. The small size makes scratchbuilding fun, but full kits, partial kits, and plans are available for less ambitious skippers.

A Footy is a great boat for all anyone. A competitive Footy can be built for less than $100, is easily portable, and regattas can be held in the smallest of ponds; even in your backyard swimming pool!

[LEFT]Since the class has yet to be recognized as an international class, now would be the time to have a vote on this, rather than waiting until even more are built. Back when the rules were proposed, I recall specifically pointing out that class rules in a development class should be minimal with only physical characteristics identified more to control size - and that any other rules should be avoided as they restrict true development efforts. To this end there was a great box rule to identify the physical size of the boat, and a mast height and keel depth pretty much defined the maximum sail area and required righting moment needed so that was self limiting by virtue of how much physical sail material one could put into the air and still have stability in a breeze.

Then the folks started “mucking about” with the “other rules” …

Specific battery size
Number of radio channels
Outboard versus inboard rudders

The first two in an attempt to help control cost through weight perhaps? Yet, unlike the a few other classes, was there no thought to eliminating carbon and allowing only wood or fiberglass in hull construction - which in my opinion were fine since the class was advertised as “developmental”.[/LEFT]

Looking at the above with personal commentary:
Battery type/size. An issue that isn’t … Cost - the most expensive batteries cost about the same as a yard of carbon, so cost cannot be an issue, if carbon and it’s associated cost isn’t an issue. Safety - sorry but a piece of burning plastic only 12 inches long in the middle of a pond somehow fails to connote a safety issue in my mind. Once out of the water, batteries are unplugged. This is kind of a personal safety thing… since safety belts for wheelchair bound skippers, or Personal Flotation Devices for those skippers walking on shore who “could” fall in a drown are also missing. One wonders how far an organization is going to go to “protect” us from our own stupidity?

[LEFT]Radio channels? - Cost issue - then ban the tiny digital servos, otherwise the number will be self-policed by those wanting a lightweight boat. Why put in three if two will work and be lighter?

Outboard versus inboard rudders - the box rule was already in place, but some couldn’t understand the concept of the boat fitting INSIDE of the box so a slot was cut in the box, and then a ton of time was spent discussing how big a rudder could be to extend to the rear. If transom hung rudders were legal, then it seems sort of simple, they must fit inside the box. Want a longer waterline to be fast? Put the rudder under the hull to gain maximum hull length.
[/LEFT]

A restricted development class really sounds good, but as someone noted, the horse is out of the barn - so it would seem (to me) logical that less restrictions are possible, but more restrictions such as minimum weight will be hard to impose without making a few (or a lot) of people really upset.

As for that supposed $100 cost - perhaps the word “home built” might allow that statement to be more widely accepted.

Just some personal observations that are easy to make since there is no vested interest for me which way this is resolved.

:cool: :wink: :cool:

25

The American word is ‘sidewalk superintendent’, is it not? :devil3::zbeer:

26

Hi Angus -

Perhaps as a "Sidewalk Superintendent * " some non-members interested in the class but not participating due to fundamental differences between what was originally proposed and what currently is, may have a better and possibly a more unbiased view than those who were so deeply involved in the development of the rules.

C.2 Batteries are restricted to 4 no. AA size batteries placed within the hull.

E.4 Materials shall not be of density higher than lead; 11300kg/m3.

Let’s look at each above - and without the blinders of rule-writer/enforcer:

Starting with E.4 first:
FACT: this rule does NOT prohibit anything lighter than lead.

Rule C.2 Batteries MUST BE 4 no. AA size batteries placed within the hull. -

I included the lead point, since Lithium is lighter than lead by almost 80% by some technical accounts, so the weight compared to lead is not a disqualifying factor.

Regards, Your S.W.S. :propeller*

27

Just so no one is confused by Dicks last 2 posts.
The CURRENT footy class rules in there CURRENT form are the ONLY footy class rules EVER sanctioned by any model yachting body ever.
There has NEVER been any other rule at all…EVER

Dicks posts infer that the rules have been hacked and changed etc…they have not in any way shape or form.
Any discussion that has been on this forum re footy class rules in the past is just that…discussion.
The footy class rules where put together by a small international group without any official input by these forums.

28

For hot Lipo’s:

My last engine installation the Antares 44i was deisel yanmars. After I left Please Don’t Quit (PDQ yachts), there was one built with all electric drives, with ginormous lipo’s to power it all. These were installed in custom-welded aluminum boxes, just incase they wanted to self-destruct. Could wee boxes not be used to contain wee Lipo’s in da footies. Just a thought.

And for those whom might be mad from a minimum weight rule, what about giving a season before the rule is implemented, giving them time to cool down and prepare their emotions for when the rule kicks in.

Just another thought.:slight_smile:

29

Dick! I thought better of you! Your sidewalk is obviously somewhere in the legal disrict of Philadelphia. Density is a well-recognised scalr quaniy. Battery is no.

:graduate:

30

Nigel, Dick,

With the limited current consumption of a Footy I wouldn’t have thought there was much risk of a problem while actually sailing.

As I understand things the main problem could be with charging as in the video link in post 17 of this thread.

Cheers,

firstfooty

31

The LiPo batteries that Brett and Pete Schug mention are used in r/c planes and cars. Neither one of these craft are exposed to water.

When r/c gear quits it is usually because water in the hull gets to the electrics. While most of the recorded incidents of LiPos catching on fire or exploding seem to happen during the charging cycle when a runaway chemical reaction takes place I am not sure I want to gamble on having the same reaction occurring during a rapid discharge due to a short on board. The rcgroups website records one fire that continued to burn underwater after the owner dropped the battery into a bucket of water in an attempt to extinguish it.

We don’t play with our sailboats in a vacuum, racing venues invariably need to be okayed by some local authority or other. One burning boat on the lake will make it pretty hard to find another place in your area that will let your group sail. See Graham’s earlier post about the British r/c speed boat ban.

Okay, so you’ve traveled to an out of town event. Day one is over and you’ve returned to the hotel and set the LiPos on charge. Do you carry enough personal liability insurance in case the hotel burns down while you are at the Saturday night dinner party? Or your buddy’s house if you are staying with a friend? What if someone dies in the fire? In that case you might face charges of criminally negligent homicide because the batteries you were charging have a documented history of fire risk.

On a practical note, Brett’s 3.7v Lipo patches last for one heat. In some r/c classes here in the US national, regional, (both with low entries) or local races, all the skippers usually compete in every heat. I imagine that this will be the case for Footy racing for the next few years at least. That would mean a skipper who opted to use these little LiPos would be swapping them out as many as 12 times a race day. Since, in the pursuit of light weight, the boat will be sealed with with a one use hatch cover of sticky back dacron or plastic film, that will have to be replaced each time as well. The deck area around the hatch opening will have to be dry for the adhesive on the new cover to stick. This sounds to me like a lot of work between heats. Particularly if something else requires your attention as well, something breaking, changing to the storm rig, protest hearing, etc. Keeping your head in the racing is enough work, but of course using this approach is the individual’s call.

I don’t think that LiPos are worth the associated risk. I also don’t think that the Footy rules should mandate the battery type either, particularly if the competitive imperative shunts us toward throw-away Lithium Energizer cells. Specifying battery type binds us and keeps us from taking advantage of newer, presumably safer, more efficient technologies that will be available down the road, and the performance gains lighter boats or those with better weight displacement to ballast ratios will realize.

32

Fascinating discussion. Let me throw in my observations as a club level sailor who tries to organise events. At present the only two real restrictions in the rule are:- the box which imposes a maximum length and depth.(338 x 305 mm)
:- batteries, restricted to 4 AA size. (approx 70 gms min weight with current technology.)
In my part of the world we are still trying to promote and develop Footy activity using the premise of easy build, inexpensive fun, largely as an alternative or starter R/C boat.
I am surprised that the designers of Footy’s appear to be so frustrated by the battery restrictions that they are prepared to risk rendering the majority of current builds uncompetitive. Isn’t part of the challenge to design a boat which meets these restrictions or do we want to end up like the 36-600 class where only a handful of high tech boats are competitive.
How about a moratorium on rule change till after Liverpool '08, see what conclusions can be made from on water competition and off water debate. Liverpool may also indicate how far designs have really progressed since the last major event in Gosport where the penultimate in low tech, ‘Ant’ was in the money.

33

I feel we are quickly progressing to this point now. It is a fact there will always be those more skilled and talented than the rest of us. But is this class going to end up thier private domain or should we work to keep it a fun and inexpensive class enjoyed by everyone?

34

Paul - in my view that is largely what Liverpool is about. Note that Stollery’s steamrollers also cleared up at Guildford despite manuful attempts by Gary Sandrson wit Duck and Michael Van Der Peet with Moonshadow. To everyone’s tremendous susprise, two MYS “12 Model Yachts” were in the money too.

One transatlantic difference may be that the new Footy sailor in Britain is very ofen an experienced modeller or a hands-on engineer of some kind. Wha seems ‘easy’ here may seem much ‘harder’ in the USA.

35

The above quoted rules were found/taken as follows:

  1. United States AMYA FOOTY Page found here…
    http://www.modelyacht.org/footy.html

  2. Statement, bottom of page reads:
    “The AMYA Footy Class adopts the current International Footy class rules, together with all applicable rules referenced by it.”

  3. The link included in the statement “International Foot Class Rules” takes your here…
    http://footy.rcsailing.net/rules.php

  4. MY CORRECTION: Under a sub-topic titled "clarifications it does say “The number of batteries must be 4 – no more, no less”[b] - so I stand corrected on that point in my earlier post.

Dick[/b]

36

Note that there is a limit to how light you can go. As Stan Goodwin (champion M class designer/builder and world class fluid dynamics expert) points out in his Marblehead article in the latest AMYA quarterly, when you get below 8-9 lbs for a Marblehead the boat no longer has the mass to carry through a tack. Looks like 1kg is a similar limit for RG65s, and we’ll find the one for footies soon :slight_smile:

Cheers,

Earl

37

The 36/600 class is an unfortunate example of mistaken identity.

There are essentially two types of model boat classes. The developmental, experimental classes and the “comfortable” classes. The comfortable classes, those in which change is stagnate (one design kit boats for example) represent the growing majority of classes sailed here in the US. I site the paucity of manual skills as a contributing factor, although the cost of building from scratch and the free time to undertake a project also factor in. Complete boats or short kits are a much quicker route from workbench to the water.

Long lived classes that fall into the developmental category like the 36/600 tend to have spurts of design energy and then longer periods where the new norms are established. The splintering of the 36/600 class in the '90’s was the result of a crop of new, composite hulls and innovative rigging injected into a class that had assumed attributes of a comfortable class. The previously established powers in the class chose to pack up their marbles and play somewhere else rather than rise to the challenge of modernizing the fleet.

The Footy has fairly open rules and qualifies as a developmental class. If you want to be comfortable and not have to adjust to rules that may be called into question then this is not the class for you.

Rules are set to ensure that if you travel to another place to race, your boat will qualify to compete. If you don’t care to compete but just want to sail by yourself or with some of your buddies then strict compliance with the rules is not as much of a concern.

The impression that only high-tech boats are competitive and that is the reason for the declining participation in the 36/600 class should serve as a warning to those who threaten to make ultra-light designs. As a participant in the 36/600 class I have a whole lot of legal improvements that I could implement to create an advanced boat that would shake things up again. The danger is that I would also drive more class members to the one design classes or to the IOM class (which is similar in size and carries a one design rig).

As I noted in my opening post, its hard to move the majority to change its position. All the respondents so far seem to have different ideas of what the Footy rule describes. The battery rule represents the one aspect of this rule that is unique, and not found in the class rules of the other model yacht classes. Do we know better than our more established brethren?

38

I propose the following experiment to determine (or not) whether round chine Footy hulls constructed using kitchen-table techniques are competitive with carbon fiber creations achievable only by experts:

  1. Someone who molds advanced hulls lends me the male mold for their hull.
  2. I build a hull on that mold using the cold-molding technique I’ve described elsewhere. No vacuum-bagging, fiberglass and wood only.
  3. I return the mold and the hull the hull to expert builder.

At this point an Admiralty Board is convened wherein Their Lordships assess strength, weight and fitness for purpose compared to the high-tech equivalent. Liverpool will do, but a pub in Portsmouth would be even more appropriate :-).

Any takers?

Cheers,

Earl

39

It seams that there is a trend of nah-saying the pro stuff, because it is not the same as ameteur kitchen stuff. :mad:

What about the, “High-tech expert builder” that builds on their kitchen table?

The particular builder here (me) does, “high tech expert building”, to market his "high-tech expert building skills, not so much what the product is.

If I from this marketting I get a gig in Dubai, laying-up “Victory cats”, man I’m gone! :smiley: That kind of $, will help me retire quicker, so I can sail my little R/C boats around the globe, like most of you retired folk.

I can easily duplicate what I do with balsa, foam, cardboard, resin-soaked paper, cold butter (well maybe not cold butter) :lol: etc.

The way I see it is, there are two types: Producers or Consumers. I’ve chosen Producer, because I can’t afford to be a consumer of, “High-tech-wonder-composite-product”. So I learned how to make what-ever I need!

WE ARE ALL AMETEURS, MUCKING ABOUT WITH EXPERIMENTAL WEE BOATS, CAUSE WERE ALL HOBBIEST-TINKERER-TYPE FOLK, WHO LIKE TO PLAY WITH OUR WEE TOYS.

Also venting a little. Sorry if anyone is offended. :zbeer:

40

Oops, I was meant to start this as a new thread. Oh well, next time.