All donations are securely managed through PayPal. Amounts donated are not published online.
Many thanks for your kind support.
Model Boats Website Team
February 2019: 8 people January 2019: 16 people December 2018: 6 people November 2018: 11 people October 2018: 9 people September 2018: 13 people August 2018: 5 people July 2018: 8 people June 2018: 8 people May 2018: 7 people April 2018: 9 people
Hi Colin, I have just been catching up on this commentary which was prompted by your initial question. In running my 'Forceful' tug I found that varying paddle speeds, i.e. a mixer, is unnecessary for steering. I run it with the paddles at the same speed, and the rudder handles the steering alone just fine. I wonder if you have run your model, and confirmed that you have to vary paddle speeds to turn? If so, another option is to replace the rudder with a bigger one. Roy
I am interested in getting in touch with anyone who has built a sailing model of "Empress of Britain" or "Empress of England" to Vic Smeed's plan. I'd like to know if they built to scale draft, and if the model was stable and sat at waterline depth. Roy
This rotation question seems to pop up regularly. Probably for a model, rotation direction doesn't really matter, but one authoritative answer can be found here: http://modeltugforum.com/index.php?topic=5947.0, which quotes from the Ship Handler's Guide. To summarise the comments: Outward-turning propellers means the blades of the propellers are outward turning in the upper half of their circle of rotation, and, when viewed from astern, the propeller with the right-hand blades is on the starboard (right) side and again, when viewed from astern to drive the boat forward, it must rotate in a clockwise direction. This is the preferred arrangement on full-size ships because when using the props to assist a turn, i.e one prop pushing ahead and one pushing astern, the side thrust from the two propellers assists the turn. The attached image from www.slideshare.net may help. Roy
I sympathise Norm. I contacted the Tyne and Wear Museum for plans of the "Empress of Canada". I would need 5 sheets, 4 at £42 each and one at £63. £231!!! Not economical for a retired model builder. Roy
The main advantage of Eze-kote may be its main disadvantage: it's water-based. As stated on the Great Hobbies website, "This product may be damaged by freezing. Shipping during periods of weather below zero is not recommended." So in Canada, shipping between December and May is not recommended. It does not state "Protect from freezing" on the bottle, but it would be helpful if someone who has tried it can confirm it's OK after freezing. There are 4 Great Hobbies stores in Canada if you are lucky enough to be able to visit and pick up the product. Roy
Hi Dave, I guess I have not run my models long enough yet since I have had no wear in either shafts, bearings or seals. I did have one seal in a Raboesch assembly, in a twin shaft model, which didn't leak but seemed to be deteriorating. Raboesch supplied a replacement free of charge. I had used Goop adhesive to attach the seal/bearing cap so it was a 5 minute job to soften the adhesive with a heat gun and fit the replacement. Roy
Every time I see a post about lubricating a prop shaft I wonder why more people don't used sealed prop shafts, such as those made by Raboesch and others. It's clearly not an option if your model has the prop shaft already in place but for new construction it's a case of 'fit and forget'. I have not used anything else, ever. Is the extra cost the only disincentive to their universal adoption? Roy
It's one of the facets of scratchbuilding that is little talked about. It seems inevitable that undesirable features (I don't want to say errors) will occur and then there's some serious head-scratching about whether to ignore, cover up, fix (and how to) or start again. This is a great encouragement to others facing similar dilemmas to figure out a fix.
A really intriguing choice of model, and a great example of where inspiration can be found for a scratch-built model. I will look forward to seeing a picture of the finished vessel. I notice that the book does not contain any information on the hull lines; what did you use as the source for the shape of your frames? Roy
In view of Doug's experience, we contacted Godaddy. They advised us that we need SSL certification for our site. I'm a complete novice when it comes to website design and security but I learnt two things. One is that SSL is indicated by the green padlock and the 's' in https in the address bar. The second is that it's considered vital if sensitive information is being transmitted, such as credit card data, usernames and passwords, etc. And of course, SSL costs money. A scan of the list of clubs on this website showed that only one has SSL and they are using Google Sites, Google being actively pushing for SSL on everything. We are a group of model boaters whose website is simply making available for viewing some of our activities, we are not collecting anything from visitors. In conclusion, we will not be making any changes, and so McAfee users will continue to receive the message Doug reported. Roy
Garth, no doubt that Graupner make excellent products but CAD$35 + shipping is a stretch. Especially when you can make up a double universal for CAD$10 with two of these. I've been using these for several years now. Roy
If I start a model using a fibreglass hull the first thing I do is bolt it down to a building board, just as RHBaker has done. Access to the bottom is not needed until painting, so the model can be worked on 'keel down'. I have two end boards that can be screwed on to the building board, and these allow me to lay the hull on its side, or upside down, and be stable, if I need to work on it that way. When the hull is ready for painting the holes in the hull are filled and sanded.
Our club's 2nd annual "Light up the night" evening sail with lights on. The weather co-operated so it was dry and balmy after the sun went down. Lots of spectators on hand to enjoy the spectacle. Some boats were lit up like Christmas trees but others had the bare minimum navigation lights; at times navigating was a challenge.
I share your frustration with paper plans that stretch with high humidity, but never shrink back when the humidity drops, and stretch more when the humidity rises again. (One reason why drawing offices used to make tracings on mylar. ) I use paper plans as a guide or for measuring small dimensions. For larger dimensions I work from a digital file, using software such as GIMP (which is free) to take measurements - making sure that the digital image is to size !
Dave, I edit this site and have done since we set it up in February so I can hardly refrain from visiting it. It was set up using the Godaddy facility and, as such, is their responsibility to ensure security. Sounds like we might have made the wrong choice regarding host. Roy
Gentlemen, many thanks for all the feedback. To respond to Dave's questions first: the charger I have been using is an MRC Super Brain 989, and the recorder is an Eagletree Micropower E-logger V2; both are off-the-shelf items and not calibrated. I know there can be some discrepancy between the two, but surely not enough to explain the numbers? I cannot check the temperature of the battery. That will be affected by another variable - charge and discharge current, will it not? As Dave and Doug have pointed out, I made a very, very rough, simple, conservative calculation of mAh looking at the chart. I did not try to be mathematically precise. It was a number for me to explain my question of whether the apparent charge and discharge efficiencies made sense and could they be explained. I have learnt a lot from this exchange and, since I have already acquired 3 battery chargers over the years, I am reluctant to invest in another one only to measure battery impedance. Question is now, does future potential use of such a charger make better financial sense than simply throwing away the questionable batteries and replacing them. Decisions, decisions. One final question, what charge and discharge efficiencies would you expect from a new battery past its "running-in" duration? I am aware that mAh capacities are not based on any recognised standard, but I have been led to believe that the stated capacities of Panasonic and Venom batteries are more reliable than most. Thanks again, Roy
Doug, Regarding your comment, "Avoid using double jointed couplings, they waste power and create wear and noise". Can you please explain this in more detail? I have heard this comment before, but my experience has been quite the opposite. No noise, no wear (yet) and no noticeable loss of power, presumably evidenced by the couplings getting hot. Roy
Here's a conundrum that I'd like your thoughts on. I recorded some data on one of my boats now running on a couple of the battery packs that were cycled as discussed earlier. They are 6V 5000mAh NiMH packs which, after their final charge, showed they received 5500mAh according to my charger. For the subsequent run I fitted a recorder which showed the current consumption, as on the attached chart; typically 2.55A, with a maximum of 2.9A. A rough consumption calculation based on the chart, of 2.55A for 70 minutes, is a little less than 3000mAh. When I recharged them after the run, the charger showed they'd taken 3850mAh. Why the difference between the 3000mAh consumption, and the replacement charge of 3850mAh? The charge and discharge efficiencies are obviously less than 100%, but this data suggests that the two combined are only 78%. So, for example, if the two efficiences are equal (89%), if the charger states a charged value of 5000mAh, the battery has only accepted 4450mAh (=5000*89/100). When delivering the power, it can only put out 3960mAh.(=4450*89/100). Or in other words, only 78% of a battery's stated capacity is usable. Or is there a different explanation? Roy