Yachting Volume I Part 8

Watson) have met for the consideration of the questions put before us in the circular of the Council of the Yacht Racing a.s.sociation, dated September 27, 1892.

We have considered that, besides the saving in time to the Council and to ourselves, it would be more satisfactory for many reasons to have such a preliminary meeting for interchange of ideas on the important issues raised in this circular, and we trust that this course of action will be approved of by the Council. We may state that we are practically unanimous in the opinions hereinafter expressed, the only exception being on the one point of taxing overhang, Mr. Ridsdale feeling that he could not go with the majority in this.

We would, then, most respectfully submit to your Council that as designers of racing yachts we have no desire whatever to interfere with the present rating rule. It has the merit of being the existing rule, and is a perfectly fair one for racing yachts together by, as indeed is any rule whatsoever, so far as designers are concerned, provided its conditions are clearly stated beforehand. But as naval architects, and, if we may be permitted to say so, as trustees for the yachting public, we think it our duty to point out any deteriorating tendency in a rule. We cannot help fearing that the present length and sail-area rule has such a tendency, and is leading, if it has not already led, to an unwholesome type of boat.

We take it that the general yachting public require in a yacht: That she shall be safe in all conditions of wind and weather; that she shall combine the maximum of room on deck and below with the minimum of prime cost; and that she shall be driven as fast as may be with the least expenditure of labour--i.e. that she shall have a moderate and workable sail-area. Therefore, as but few men can afford to build for racing, and for racing only, and as the racer of to-day is the cruiser of a few years hence, any rating rule should by its limitations encourage such a wholesome type of vessel.

On the above a.s.sumptions we have based our advice, and it is for your Council, as representing the general body of yachtsmen, to determine whether these a.s.sumptions are correct or not.

We are all agreed, then, that the present length and sail-area rule is a most admirable one for the cla.s.sification and regulation of time allowance of racing yachts. But we are also of opinion that the tendency of this rule is such as to induce a vessel of so large dimensions, relative to displacement and internal capacity (i.e. the useful living room on board the s.h.i.+p), that it is advisable to so alter or modify this rule that a type of vessel having more body may be evolved.

We suggest that length and sail-area (as being the leading elements in speed) should be preserved in some form, but modified so as to make it the interest of builders to produce a bigger-bodied boat.

The direct method of doing this would be to introduce displacement or register tonnage in some way as a divisor in the formula, but we foresee so many difficulties in the practical working of this that we are not prepared to advise it.

By taxing breadth and draft or, alternatively, girth, and by reducing the tax on sail, we think this result may be arrived at indirectly. As to the precise value that each element should take in such a formula, we, at this stage, are not prepared to venture an opinion.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 'Florinda,' yawl, 126 tons. Built by Camper and Nicholson, 1873.]

The above on the general principles of the rule.

But we also feel that the details of measurement, &c., require revision.

_On the hull._--The overhang, at least forward, should be taxed, as it may be carried to such an extent as to be a source of danger, but it need not be taxed excessively or to extinction.

The L.W.L. should be marked forward and aft.

Should girth or draft be used in the formula in centreboard vessels, some proportion of the drop of board should be added, and a limit should be placed on the weight of the board.

In the smaller cla.s.ses, at least, the crews should be limited.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 'Kriemhilda,' 106 tons. Built by Ratsey, 1872.]

_On the sails._--The perpendicular of fore triangle should be measured from top of deck to where the line of luff of sail would cut mast.

That the question of limiting the relative area of mainsail to total sail in the various cla.s.ses be considered.

Mr. Alexander Richardson, of Liverpool, was unable to be present at this meeting, but this note has been submitted to him, and receives his endorsation:--

The Council of the Yacht Racing a.s.sociation, however, took the view that what the yacht-owning public want in a racing yacht is speed, and speed at any price, and on the yacht-builders clearly understanding this they withdrew their objections as having been made under a misunderstanding, but asked to be tied down to some extent, in a letter dated November 8, and in the following words:--

'Our opinions, as expressed in that letter of October 6, practically remain unaltered; but so far as we are able to interpret the wishes of yacht-owners, as stated in the public prints, and more especially as expressed by your chairman and the majority of your committee, we now take it that speed, and speed before other good qualities, is what is to be aimed at.

'We consequently withdraw any suggestions made in that letter, as having been made under a misapprehension as to your requirements.

'But while it may be determined to retain a length and sail-area rule, either in its present or in some slightly altered form, we would most respectfully suggest that, at least in the cla.s.ses above 5-rating (if, indeed, a lower line should not be drawn), the tendency toward abnormal and un-s.h.i.+pshape form should be curbed in some way. The main direction in which we would propose such limitation in form would be in the outline of longitudinal section, and we would suggest that this should be bounded by a fair line, concave, or at least not convex, toward the water-line. That the sternpost should show, say, a quarter of an inch above the water-line aft, and the rudder be hung thereon. That overhang forward and aft should be restricted, as also the extreme forward position of mast; but as we deem it undesirable to absolutely prohibit any form, we would simply propose to tax such variations from this normal one so heavily as to make their adoption unprofitable.'

The Yacht Racing a.s.sociation, however, thought it undesirable to limit form in any way, and beyond the adoption of the proposed method of measuring the fore triangle, and marking the L.W.L., the rule remained unaltered.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 'Florinda,' yawl.]

1893 therefore saw new boats in the cla.s.ses, fast, it is true, in fresh breezes, but undesirable from anything but a racing point of view. In the uncla.s.sed vessels above 40-rating things were not quite so bad, as with a practically unlimited sail-area a fair amount of body was required to carry it. Besides, men who did not mind spending two or three thousand on a 'machine' hesitated before putting down ten or twelve. In America, however, where money is spent like water when the national honour is at stake, 85-foot machines were built on the off chance of their being successes; but it is gratifying alike to American and British yachtsmen that the Cup should have been defended by such a wholesome type of vessel as 'Vigilant' undoubtedly is.

In a short chapter showing the evolution of the modern racing yacht, many links in the chain of descent must be left unnoticed. I have had to leave almost undescribed Dan Hatcher's wonderful fleet, beginning in 'Glance' and 'Muriel,' and culminating, perhaps, in 'Norman'; Nicholson's famous schooners and yawls ('Florinda' was a standing miracle for years); Michael Ratsey's equally fine s.h.i.+ps; Richardson's grand cutters and Clayton's clever 'length cla.s.sers'; the work accomplished, and still being accomplished, by the famous William Fifes, besides many others whose labours are more fully recorded in other parts of these volumes. But I think no one of all that band who have loved and worked for the sport of yacht racing cares for the type of s.h.i.+p which has been evolved by their own ingenuity and the present Y.R.A. rule, and I am convinced that they would thankfully welcome any legislation which should protect the yachting public against the present extravagant, costly, and by no means seaworthy type of boat.

[Ill.u.s.tration: 'Florinda'--mids.h.i.+p section.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: H.M. brig 'Lady Nelson,'[4] 60 tons (1797), to Australia. Three keels, 1798, 1800-1-2.]

[Footnote 4: The first s.h.i.+p to discover that Tasmania was an island.]

CHAPTER V

SLIDING KEELS AND CENTREBOARDS

BY R. T. PRITCHETT[5]

[Footnote 5: The Editor desires to express his acknowledgments to Mr.

Pritchett for much energetic service kindly rendered during the preparation of these volumes.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: MIDs.h.i.+P SECTIONS, DATES, AND TONNAGE OF SCHOONERS, YAWLS, AND CUTTERS.

_Drawn to scale by J. M. Soper, M.I.N.A._]

Centreboards have been so prominently before the yachting world of late that, endeavouring carefully to avoid the argumentative phases of the question, it may be well to notice certain points of their history which may be generally unknown. Centreboards are essentially American in general adoption. Their origin was the natural outcome of the shallow coasts and sand-banks of New York Bay and the New Jersey coast, where wild fowl flock, and the fowler finds happy hunting grounds. Sportsmen originally sank boxes in the marshes; in the course of time these developed in length, and became 'scows' or floating blinds; then the corners forward were rounded off, to facilitate their being hauled up on a beach or bank. This mobility led to their pa.s.sing into deeper water, the scows were developing into boats, and then came the practical germ of centreboards. To give stability to the box, a hand board was dropped through a well slot, as the simplest way of achieving the object, until they reached land or some other marsh. The board was not hinged or pivoted in any way, and when no longer required was pulled up and laid on the floor of the craft, ready for any emergency. These boards were first known as 'dagger boards,' and as they were likely to touch the sand unexpectedly, they were rounded off at the bottom, curving aft, so that notice was given, and before the hull touched the ground the boat could be put about into deeper water. This was the early form of American centreboard. On this side of the Atlantic, it is to be noted, our forefathers were not so prejudiced against their introduction as many are inclined to a.s.sume. In 1774 A.D. Lord Percy had a boat built in Boston, New England, with one long centreboard, and sent over here in order that he might try the new system in this country. In 1789 a boat was built at Deptford with three centreboards or sliding keels.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Built in Boston for Lord Percy, 1774, with one centreboard.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Built at Deptford, 1789, with three sliding keels.]

The Admiralty in 1790 A.D. had a revenue cutter called the 'Trial,'

built with three sliding keels. The report was most satisfactory, and a note on their application describes--

Use of fore keel in tacking and laying to.

Use of keels on a wind, raised or depressed according as necessary to a.s.sist helm or gain the wind.

Use of after keel, in wearing or scudding in a gale of wind.

Keels hove up going over shoals or before the wind.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Laying to.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: On a wind.]