model yachting Australia - including d'12metre radio yacht forums

I think part of the issue is we forget what it was like when we first come across Radio Yachting.
This is also a problem when promoting full size sailing as well.

Normally those involved in the promotion are long standing sailors with years of experience and knowledge and whilst this is great for imparting information it is very hard to communicate it in such a way that is either not too technical or so basic its patronising.

It's hard to put ourselves in the position of a newcomer as we automatically take so much for granted.
In full size we bemoan that people won't travel to Open meetings but we forget that some people have never even towed a trailer before or have never even taken the mast down.

With the MM we have a perfect boat for getting new people into the sport as long as we can pitch the promotion correctly.

Like I said it's not easy.

 Well there you go.... I knew there was some rational explanation.

AHHHH, Good point Mav but which one? The German one or the Dutch one? Will  it be MMs at forty paces?

You are allowed to drill up to 6 additional holes in the deck.
These are used for external switches, bung, charging plugs, external sheet adjustment etc.
especially useful so that you don't need to open the canopy to gain access.
Not performance related

You are allowed to place an additional pice of material at the base of the keel boax to increase the mating area, (quality of standard moulding can vary) and also to give additional wear protection where the mast meets the hull. There have been a number of instances where the mast has pushed clean through the Hull!
Not Performance related

The abs servo tray can be removed from the MKI keelbox - this brings it in line with the MKII keelbox.
Not Performance related

Internal layout is free. In other words if you can think of a better way to layout your servos and sheeting/rudder arrangement then you are allowed to try.
Not performance related

Minimum weight is 860g - the weight of a standard MKII so not performance related in terms of improvement over OOB.

You don't have to fit the abs ballast covers but the finished ballast must still fit inside the supplied covers.
Minor performance increase, significant in easing build and finishing.

You are allowed spars of up to 7mm dia.
This enables people to replace a broken mast with the most common carbon light weight Kite spars available for usually around $5.
Performance related but only really kicks in when the standard rig is over powered anyway.

The rules for rig essentially set out a max height and size but running rigging is uncontrolled so you could run with or without shrouds.
Performance is reduced slightly but risk of snagging other boats is greatly reduced.

Sails are restricted in size by saying that no sail must extend further in any direction beyond the standard supplied sail.
Performance not increased but the use of smaller sails extends the weather window.

There is a restriction of only two servos to be used even though the MKII is designed to accommodate three.
This is to keep things fairer with the MKI which was not designed with a third servo and also to keep the costs down so you don't need a three channel radio and adding unnecessary complication.
Performance reduced slightly

The rules can be seen at http://www.micromagic.info/MMI_rule.pdf






-- Edited by GBR_Mike at 09:00, 2008-07-01

To be fair the Germans rule was the first.
Steven will no doubt correct me but the potted history is,
Steven didn't think the German Open rule would sell in Holland so he came up with a more restricted rule which allowed people to sail the MKI and modify the frankly woeful standard rig but keep things as simple as possible.
This was hugely successful in Holland over the next five years and was picked up in France, Spain, Portugal, Switzerland and to a lesser extent in Belgium and Canada.
I then met up with Steven in late 2006 and we produced the International rule and brought the UK, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and now the yanks and you guys.

The camps are somewhat polarised but last year we did get the top German sailors at the European Championship in INT legal boats and they seemed on the face of it to enjoy the event.
However the power base in the German fleet are still very entrenched in following their rule so apart from a few guys who sail both rules I don't think the German Association will fall into line with the International rule any time soon but you never know.

So given the history its not surprising the Germans felt and still feel a little aggrieved as their rule has been essentially sidelined and what's worse was it was instigated by the Dutch.

In Europe there have been wars based on less!!

There are a number of Germans who have built 2nd boats to compete in the International rule events.

An International rule boat can compete with the Open boats and apparently will be just as fast until the wind is over 10knts.
The open rule allows multiple keels of different weights and bulb configuration so in theory at least they will be faster up wind but some say they tend to be slower to plane downwind.

I have seen that a good sailor in a INT rule boat has won events at a German Open event.
There are a growing number in Germany that support the INT rule and we wait for the critical mass to be reached when we can gain an official foothold but there is quite a lot of animosity from some members of the Open Rule group which is a great shame.

With 14 Nations following the INT rules so far and just a couple following the Open rule I know where my money would be.

For clarity I thought I'd detail the current situation.

There are two rules.

The German "Open" rule which allow a great deal of freedom and is popular in Germany with a few in France, Russia and a couple in Holland.
The MM designer, Thomad Dreyer, is behind this rule and his vision of how the MM should progress is very much based on a more open, free and less organised scenario.
In full size terms this rule is similar in form to the 18' skiff.

The International rule is a restricted rule.
Primarily designed so that the large number of existing MKI MM's can race along side the new MKII.
We have little desire to check boats at an event so the rules reflect those areas which are visually easy to check with essentially non-performance related areas left free whilst performance related areas given limits.
For example how you lay out your boat internally has little effect on performance, is difficult and time consuming to check so in the Int rule this area is left free.
Sails and rigs are performance related so there are restrictions on area, mast dia, (based on the most popular MKI adopted mast)
The rest is pretty much stock except for a few non-performance related items like fittings, tiller control.

In A rig conditions there is little if any performance difference between a bog standard MKII and a MKI or MKII modified to the Int rule.
In "B" rig conditions, with small waves the MKII is slightly faster downwind than the MKI.
Obviously any bog standard MKII using a B rig is no longer bog standard!
In very high winds there is a chain of thought that the MKI is faster than the MKII, especially upwind but again the differences are small and missing a tack or shift will make far more difference.

We made a mistake in the rules allowing people to use a MKI keel in a MKII hull and visa versa.
We admit this mistake but there is little proof that there is any great gain in performance either way and subsequently there are very few people who wish the rule to be changed.
So currently this remains as a regret on Steven and my part.

So the term "heavily modified" in terms of the Int rule is really an inaccurate term.
Yes there are mods, most are non performance related and those that are, are cheap and easy to do and not do not make the standard kit boat obsolete.
The additional rigs allow us to sail in winds greater than the designed parameters allowing us to sail in all conditions and at all venues which makes the class far more inclusive than almost any other RC Class, from sailing in a small pond of just 9" deep to racing round marks in a marina on the Med or like me on the North Sea in the same water as I sail my full size yacht.

According to my latest figures that I gleaned from MMI on Sept07 was the boats regoed  to the kits sold was about 57%. Lets face it this is a great number and one that you should be very proud of. However the percentage of MOD boats would be even less of that 57% number.  Now the my question is , is the number between OOB and Mod side by side or what?

 Perhaps this boat is an intro type boat and not what we would like it to be?  Now don't get me wrong here , I'm not trying to destroy anything here but maybe you have found in hard racing the limitations of this little boat. And possibly, it is time for a more robust version of this class to take the strain of hard competition?

it is also possible to roll the main up like a reef

If you think you can attract people with such measures: then go ahead. To silly for words. The MM is a very well sailing boat. The MKII rig is excellent OOB. Sailors like that and do not want to throttle down. They like to play with their sails, good sails, nice shape, improve VMG., not turning their boat into a kid's toy (although in Holland we got some very good teenagers in competition).

Ok you raise an interesting point in terms of how you quantify a successful or unsuccessful Class.
Should you use,

1, Number of boats sold
2, Number of boats sailed at local clubs
3, Number of boats at Open Meetings
4, Number of boats at National or International Championships.

With this information do you then factor in,
How long the Class has been in existence,
What spread Internationally does the Class have,
How many National Class Associations have been established.
How many websites have been established.
What are the visitor stats.

Some or all of the above may be relevant in gauging success but to be useful you need to use the same selection for all classes to make an effective comparison.

Graupner, the manufacturer, have produced 12000 mkI MM's since 2001 and just under 3000 MKII since Jan 2007.
They have had a few problems keeping up with demand to the point where they have been investing in new equipment which will increase production capability.
The manufacturer has been totally caught unaware of what he has produced.
They make their money from Planes, Cars and electronics.
Yachts are a very small part of their business.
They seem a little bemused about all the fuss that the boat has generated and it's taken time for us to get them to understand that keeping the specification stable is vital.

Actually requesting that they change anything at this stage will fall on deaf ears as the demand is so high for the current MKII and will also send a mixed message that they may not at this stage fully understand.
Remember also that the International body is still very much in it's infancy so our leverage is currently limited although we have had some commitments to maintain the bill of parts as it is and I feel they now understand the ramifications of any change.
This should ensure that our rules will also remain constant.

Thats very interesting Mike, However you make a few errors here , for instance a boat that is being built is as a "counted" boat ? As an example Aust Rego numbers for the M class is about 2000, that does not mean there are 2000 actual boats sailing or racing. The same with your figures as well. The ROW is a bit rubbery as well. The actual proof of the pudding is in the eating of it. I am only disputing the figures of boats actually competing , this give the true story.Does the 2000 odd boat in the Netherlands racing in all the championships. Some part of that 2000 odd? just how many, just as a rough guide, perhaps?

 Secondly, you say that partly the reason why modifications have been done is because of salt water, close sailing and other factors and somehow "out of date" factors  and that the OOB discipline  of the boat has changed, because of these factors. Well I accept that ! So what has the Class done about bringing the Manufacturer into line?

The further you go down this road, you get, the more of these things get out of kilter, you would agree? Basically , you're telling me that you were forced onto this track that the class is taking because of local conditions? So why not fix it? Because at some point it is either you (the class) or the Manufacturer has to fix it. Otherwise the OOB is not going to be anything like the boat on the water.

Didn't I tell you Mav that there were lots of people who read your forum? So they have told you what you already knew. I find it a bit hard to swallow the "Boat of thousands" , though. Claims are easy to make but hard to prove. We saw those claims about another class but they were never proved!

Still the fact remains of If the boats were any good Why are they modifying them, his answer was that they like to fiddle. Gives a break! He tells us his wife and son has got one , is he going to modify his and not his wife's , does he want to eat cold bake beans the rest of his life?

 Well at least Mav, as I said to you before, you have their attention and you didn't get it by blowing sunshine!!

Hi Mav, and the rest of you guys.

You know rules are a real pain,
You need them but at the same time you wish you didn't.

The Micro Magic International rules are no exception.
If we could ensure that the manufacturer would maintain exactly the same specification and didn't change suppliers of ballast, sails and release a new updated boat every now and then with little if no warning
and if there were not already over 2000 Micro Magics sailing accross Europe of varying specs, we wouldn't need a rule at all.

However life is never that easy, so we end up with a Class rule, a simple one, but a rule all the same.

Henry, yes there are a lot of modified boats, however a bog standard boat out of the box is just as fast as the most heavily modified ones to the International rule.
A recent event in the UK saw a standard boat beat myself and 16 other MM's out of sight because he was simply a better sailor.
2nd place at last years European Championships was a standard boat.
So yes there are modified boats but the modifications make little difference to performance and are controlled by the Int Rules.

Believe me when I say that if somebody came up with a mod that did make a significant difference, then the International committee would clamp down on it very fast as we have thousands of owners all over the world that rely on the maintenance of the level playing field.

Why modify in that case?
Because some people get extra enjoyment out of it, I know I do.

Mav, my vision is not really relevant to the direction the AUS class takes.
It's really a matter for you guys to define and us Pom's should mind our own business.
Every country has built their Class in a different way and what works up here won't nesessarily work down there.

The USA are about to kick things off and they are even more rigid in terms of organisation first, MM second.

As far as AUS is concerned, from up here, (with no prior knowledge of the history of AUS RC sailing) things seem to be going pretty well.

71 registered boats, various events organised and held and a committee that seems to be working well.
Quite how this sits in the wider RC yachting scene in OZ is again something that we in Europe are totally unaware as our measure of success in other countries is based on the number and rate of new boats registered and the number of events and attendees.

I think the MM is the ideal RC boat for new people.
Not only to RC yachting but to sailing as well and we have had a deal of success up here getting new people into the sport, including my wife and sons, who had exactly zero interest in the sport until the MM came along.

I think it's still a little early to judge on the success or failure of the AUS MM Class and experience has shown that the MM will be a success dispite our best efforts to foul it up






-- Edited by GBR_Mike at 22:41, 2008-06-23

Henry,

I am only one person in the overall scheme of things. My objective is to promote radio yachting.

And one way of I have of doing that is to promote frank and open discussion, between those who dare, so that folks in general have a better chance of knowing what's going on. Ignorance is so destructive.

My approch is in distinct contrast to the bookburners, who have so long ruled this sport, and who would keep people ignorant by denying them access to information and deleting posts which have views contrary to their own.
If this site can be a source of open information for those that would care to look, then that is all I ask.

I have no expectations beyond that.

-- Edited by Maverick at 22:35, 2008-06-14

Henry,

After being one of the original contributors to the Micro Magic site and forum, and being granted in its early days, the days when the ARYA heavies were just sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see whether it was going to be a goer or not before committing their services, because I already had offerred my services, I was granted the honour of being one of the "Core" members of the MM in Australia. This I did not take lightly. And the way things were going was great. We had the support of "Mike" from the UK and "Stefan" from I think Sweden. And the MM forum would not have been the success it was without these guys. And it was going great. I even wrote a few editorials about this great new promising class.

But then things changed. The ARYA bystanders who now realised that the MM was going to be a real goer decided to get on board. But they bought with them the same attitudes that had proven not to work, and which have by any standard of measurement led to the demise of interest in those ARYA sanctioned classes within Australia.  

The very first thing these ARYA members wanted to do was to establish a committee, a structure, and they were not shy about putting their own names forward to volunteer themselves as office holders. Never mind promotion of the MM, they were just concerned about their status, now that other people had demonstrated they were interested in sailing this boat.

And I admit, initially I was caught up in this unsavoury approach. But I thought I could do some good. But my posts on the MM forums unless they have been deleted by the same people who delete dissenting opinions from the official ARYA Messageboard, will know that I very quickly withdrew my offer from any positions that may be available, as I considered the attention from these established, unperforming members of other ARYA committees were now entrenched in the MM committee. A position I considered detrimental to the promotion of this boat.

I had indeed even requested from Mike, the UK guru and ultimate administrator of the MM forum that he remove me as a member, as I believed that the MM had lost its way. He refused to do that. And I can make available reasons for that refusal. But I have not been back, as I have been completely and utterly disgusted by what the ARYA members have done to the MM. In fact one email I had from Mike indicated that he was disturbed by the direction the Australian MM committe were taking, but was OK with it as it prmoted the class.

Mike, I just wonder wether you still think the same way. I agreed with your vision, but the Australian approach absolutely disgusts me.

Sorry Henry, I went into a lot of detail in response to your post. I do apologise.

But hey, I am in the process of writing an editorial for the website. 

This editorial will also include a Q and A session with a menber of the ARYA and who is also a member of the Australian MM committee. I have advised this person that I will be doing this.

I decided to do this because I totally despise and disagree with the concept of folks not being able to discuss items of interest or issue publicly. I am absolutely and totally sick and tired of behind the scenes activities occuring related to the general health of the radio yachting hobby/sport. This secretive approach has already proven to be destructive and a negative influence on this sport, and I want no part of this destruction.

Henry,

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't recall having apologised to anybody in recent times.

But if acknowledging great contributions to the sport is apologising, then I most certainly am guilty, even if I don't understand how that connection can be made.

It may have been noted that I don't shy away from trying to make constructive comments when I feel things are negatively affecting this sport, but I also do not shy away from publicly acknowledging things that affect the sport in a positive manner.

And lastly, am I not allowed to express my opinion, irrespective of whether others agree with it or not? After all, that's what discussion forums' are all about. Progress will never be made with anything if everybody thinks the same way. It is the differences of opinion, amicably resolved that drive progress.

Henry,

I'm just trying to give you some variety.

Oh, and by the way, the Micro Magic site has had a major revamp, so you might find it easier to use.

Just click on the following link to try it out.

http://www.aus.magicmicro.org/news.php