New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Dinghy Identification - Help
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Dinghy Identification - Help

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
mopuk2000 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 26 Jul 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 22
Post Options Post Options   Quote mopuk2000 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Dinghy Identification - Help
    Posted: 01 Jun 07 at 12:50am
The Following is taken from an article about the 65 trials by one of the
committee. I guess that the boats described below have all disappeared
now as the Tempest won but perhaps it is one of these classes?

"All boats entered were built up to the limits of 22 ft. overall length and
sail area of 247 ft. plus spinnaker. All had keels weighing 495 lb. Actually
most of the boats when measured proved to have exceeded the sail area
limit. We made note of this but let them sail anyway. Tempest’s area was
exactly as specified.

Hull weight of the ten new designs entered varied considerably from
under 300 lb. for Jack Knights’ home-built sharpie type Cobra to 797 lb.
for Starlet, designed by H. E. Glacer. Tempest’s bare hull was second
lightest at 440 lb. Other entrants were H. E. Glacer’s Champion, winner of
the 1963 design competition of the IYRU; John Westell’s CVP43, looking
very much like an overgrown 5-0-5; Flying Senior, a lovely looking boat
by U. Van Essen, designer of the Flying Dutchman; Rapikee, designed by
E. G. vander Stadt, and second in the design competition; J. M. Hannay’s
Satellite, a variation on the hard chine Cobra; C. & B. Silvant’s Telstar
which was more of a day-sailing than racing type, and P. Budde’s Flying
Fish. Most of them were fine looking boats."

The full article is at http://www.tempestclass.com/Info/sandbag/
appendA.html
Back to Top
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 May 07 at 12:20pm
Yes, my info (Yachting World May '52) says that Osprey was "originally
designed as tangible expression of a clear mental picture of the kind of boat
Ian Proctor hoped would be chosen, but the shape proved so intriguing to
various helmsmen who saw the lines, that a syndicate was quickly formed to
builder her and send her to Holland." So it looks like the full-scale boat
came from that conception rather than a baby Osprey.

One thing I only noticed recently was that the boat drew comment because
she relied on hiking power more than form stability.....no wonder she
benefited so much from the trap when it was fitted in those final races of the
1st round at Peter Scott's recommendation.
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 May 07 at 11:58am
Certainly not a Peregrine - what I was wondering was whether Proctor had done a prototype small version of the Osprey. Nothing in the Dinghy Yearbooks about one, so unlikely.
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 May 07 at 10:16am
Originally posted by Ch505

Chris 249


Pls show me the BS by the 505 Spin machine and I'll sort it out.  I
wasn't there - or even born for about 20 yrs afterwards.


The FD is a great boat.  The 505 is a great boat.  The Osprey is a great
boat.  All 3 designs have lasted longer than any of the current crop will.[/
P]

....and back to the subject.  The foredeck does look like an Osprey to
me.


Chas



Quick work, Huw!

Now we pedants can rest in peace. BTW, the Osprey DID play a part in the
re-emergence of the trap, it just wasn;t invented for the class.

Ch, totally agree about the excellence of these true classics. Wonderful
boats all.

However, there have been quite a few claims (not all by active 5-0that the
5-0 proto was utterly dominant in speed at the '53 trials. I must admit
that the stuff on the web these days seems to be more circumspect.

Coronet was a brilliant boat, the 505 is still listed by many skiff/etc
designers as one of the world's best boats, but Westell himself said that
Coronet's speed alone was not enough to justify a second International
class. Despite that, the IYRU went ahead and made the 505 a second
International class, yet they often just cop the blame for making the FD
Olympic (which was initially the choice of the host city, Rome, anyway).

Re the Jollyboat; it raced only in the second trials and finished =7th, it
seems, with the Hornet. The Jollyboat was sailed two up with trap but
seemed to suffer in that mode upwind in a blow and did best on fast
reaches. The Hornet (like the Osprey comparatively cheap and simple)
didn't do as well in the second trials because by then, just about all the
other boats had followed the inspiration of the Hornet and Osprey and
also adopted traps or planks.

Back on topic; the mystery boat is unlikely to be a Peregrine as that had a
lifting keel with a 270lg bulb on an 80lb steel plate fin. It was also 18'6"
overall and had "capacious watertight lockers fore and aft, and buuoyancy
tanks built under the sidedecks. The thwarts, traveller, outboard bracket,
hatch, etc is all wrong.

There's details of the beam on CVRDA; like the length, it tallies with the
beam of a Caneton as do the other details of the boat apart from the
British heritage.

Puzzling.




Edited by Chris 249
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956
Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 May 07 at 8:21pm
There is a similar thread to this running on the cvrda site about this boat. There are more pics there, and in one of them it can be seen that the mast isn't deck stepped. The construction techniques suggest that if it isn't an Osprey it is a smaller version, the existence of which I was unaware. There is, however a giant Osprey called a Peregrine, so anything is possible!
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
vscott View Drop Down
Posting king
Posting king
Avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 181
Post Options Post Options   Quote vscott Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 May 07 at 5:29pm
How did the Jolly Boat do in '52? or where can I get to that information?

(My parents had one and I have fond memories of it)
Mk IV Osprey 1314 Think Again

Kielder Water Sailing Club
Back to Top
osprey View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 07 Jan 06
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12
Post Options Post Options   Quote osprey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 May 07 at 5:01pm
The Osprey web site has been updated to reflect information provide in this thread.

Kind regards,
Huw
Back to Top
Ch505 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 07
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11
Post Options Post Options   Quote Ch505 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 May 07 at 1:28pm

Chris 249

Pls show me the BS by the 505 Spin machine and I'll sort it out.  I wasn't there - or even born for about 20 yrs afterwards.

The FD is a great boat.  The 505 is a great boat.  The Osprey is a great boat.  All 3 designs have lasted longer than any of the current crop will.

....and back to the subject.  The foredeck does look like an Osprey to me.

Chas

Charlie
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6662
Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 May 07 at 10:49am
Originally posted by Chris 249

Don't say Y & Y are repeating that line of complete cobblers!

As someone who has spent a day trawling through Y&Ys archives and failed to get all the data he was looking for I can sympathise if they are tempted to repeat what is widely stated rather than going back to the primary source if its just a sideline rather than part of the focus of the article.

If you're genuinely doing a historic piece of course there's no excuse, you have to do the research. However I can't even find the Torbole report from the 49er trials, and there are plenty of myths building up around that...
Back to Top
TheDuke View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 04 May 05
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Post Options Post Options   Quote TheDuke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 May 07 at 8:43am

It isn't a Merlin - already a lot of discussion - not enough planks, and is too long.

They did try a prototype 4 plank version of the Merlin in the 70's, but only 1-2 were built and were not liked by the class at the time.

 

cheers

 

Rich

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy