![emot-4.jpg](https://modelboatblog.tedatum.com/wp-content/gallery/jmotors/emot-4.jpg "The shaft is a rather small 1/8\\" diameter. There are splines to help hold whatever is installed on the shaft.")
Think Tank
General comments, random thoughts, decisions about the RoboBoat project, the HMS Sovereign of the Seas , and other model boat and ship ideas. Usually text only. Subjects may be random and decisions are subject to change or modification. Comments welcome.
Becalmed in the Horse Latitudes
I have had to heave to and lay up for awhile. We are into the 2011 holiday season and the workshop and work on the Dauntless roboboat project are lost in the midst (mist?) (fog?) of other projects.
I created a little wood working project called a cookie stamp set and that item has exploded as Christmas gifts. I am currently building four more sets and that might not be the end.
I have discovered there is a much larger demand (read that as market) for well crafted and unusual home products than scale steam engines and large model boats. I have people wanting to buy these cookie things! Not that I have changed my enthusiasm for either of these personal hobby indulgences, but I see what work can help pay the hobby bills.
Psyched
Yes I am really psyched for the construction of the Dauntless. Maybe that is because it is so big. Little plastic boats are toys but a big wooden boat like the Dauntless is a project. I kind of like the fact that there is an owners/builders cult around the Dauntless. There are (relatively) a lot of them sold and either finished or in some stage of construction.
Some of the boat kits sold are certainly overwhelming to the buyer/builder. It is NOT a “shake the box*” construction as I think some of them may have assumed. Some folks have no idea how to finish a scale model boat. Some boats are so poorly constructed there is no reason to finish them, so they get set aside.
But then there are the good ones. I have seen some truly great examples of the Dauntless. It is not an overly fancy boat and some scale details are missing or wrong. Those appearance items are totally under control of the builder to add detail and improve from what was in the box.
Scale boats and ships are not so much an operations type of avocation but rather a builder’s paradise. The enjoyment derived is from making the construction decisions and being creative and precise. I think the folks that fail to finish the build; do not have a real knack or lose enjoyment from the slow construction.
They may have originally seen scale model boats out running around on the local pond and think operation is what the hobby is all about. What they witnessed was just the end result, the answer to the “What do I do with it now that I have it built?” question. Some builders choose to keep them dry and put them on the mantel and look at them. Others put them on the pond to see how they look and perform in real water. The casual observer has no idea about the six month, twelve month, or more build time. Sometimes it takes years to get to the water and some boats are always being detailed and improved, never “finished”.
My RCS control system project is to put more interest in the operation, and is not intended to detract from the enjoyment of creation of the model. I am going to saver every frustration and reward of the build. Then spend a lot more time experimenting with the control system.
A well built large model boat will have the ability to exist for quite a long time. I think it can outlive its builder if it is a high quality build and has been properly finished and waterproofed. To that extent it has a much higher survivability factor than an R/C model aircraft. (I know, I have crashed my share of model aircraft.)
What is missing for the R/C flyers when they operate a scale model boat is all the speed, action and thrill of the three dimensional operational freedom. High speed power boat (racing) also provides a lot of the same adrenaline rush and so it too is quite popular. But flat water scale speed put-putting is not much of an operating adrenalin thrill. It is more like appreciating fine art.
A few builders of scale boats overpower them in an attempt to “get them up on plane” when the prototype was never intended or was capable of doing it. I believe it is an attempt to put some thrill into the operation. So what if it isn’t authentic operation, it’s fun to watch. “Hey look! There’s the QM2 up on plane jumping her own wake!” Ha!
It’s a hobby. Whatever gets you psyched is OK with me.
*Just shake the box and the loose parts join together and the boat falls out completely assembled.
The Remote Conning System (RCS)
This is a new concept of the Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV) or Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) control applied to scale model boats. RCS is intended to provide realistic scaled control rather than real time instant response. That is why the term conning system is used. However, the concept can be utilized in any type of remote vehicle control when the human response time is not critical (fast). In this affordable system the display and use of the feedback will be generally too slow to be of use or value in any high speed real time application.
Reasonable application of ROV control has been accomplished for explorer rovers both on land and under water and long range RPV aircraft of many types. The process is also well established in space and other distant world exploration but response is limited by radio signal delays. Low speed ROV’s are used to fulfill missions in the scientific, military, or hazardous investigation areas. All these applications are well established using the RCS type of feedback and are part of the inspiration for use of RCS in slow speed scale model boats.
Currently using RCS in the real time (speed and directional) control in standard R/C small field type model aircraft and all forms of high speed R/C model competition vehicles is not realistic. Scale slow operation is not desired. Data gathering and recording for later historical retrieval is the best application of RCS in these operating conditions. Speed and direction control must always be real time.
Operation of slow speed scale models could be made realistic in their rate of motion and directional control with RCS. In these cases, I am not proposing exact response scaling as I carefully selected the term realistic. The concept is the selective use of the RCS computer to introduce scale like response to commands from the com with complete override in panic situations.
This concept has been used in model train systems to provide realistic type locomotive and train operation for acceleration, drifting and braking.
A high tonnage warship certainly responds differently to helm and engine commands than a high speed personal sport runabout. The heavy ship will take a lot longer to power up, down and stop. Many boat and ship models can be grossly overpowered so they react with far better performance than the prototype craft.
With RCS it is possible to build “canned” effects into manual input and autonomous control sequences. Remember the sequences can be optional and turned off on on at will with proper programming (command) of the RCS computer.
My vision is the shore (captain’s) control will include a key pad as part of the interface. Any predefined control sequence can thus be sent to the TCS computer from the key pad via the data link to change on-board sequence of operations.
The key pad can also be used for control of any accessory or routines to control accessories. For example an entry code 789A might be used to turn on a mast light. Then code 789B used to start a computer sequence to blink the light on and off in one second intervals like a beacon. Finally 789C shuts the mast light off. It is all up to the imagination of the programmer and number of I/O pins with how they are programmed. That means there is almost no limit of the number or variation of realistic control functions available.
There are ways to extend control by using multiple processors to add additional I/O capabilities. That is far beyond the original scope of the RCS but certainly not unreasonable.
Early Boat Thoughts
Now that I have been working with the proposed control system I realize the subject boat (to be controlled) does not have to be as big as I first envisioned. The first tests will be remote basic control. Just taking control response and range into consideration.
To me that indicates I can run early tests on a smaller and cheaper to build model boat. The smaller size will also mean a smaller single motor will be needed. Less battery size will also be a benefit.
For these reasons, I am considering downsizing my first vision of the model boat required. This change justifies my plan to start with the control system first. I am learning what I need as I go. I am not sure when I will be able to commit to the actual boat selection.
At first I was thinking the bigger the model the better. Still a good plan but a lot more cost than needed for an untested communication system. I was thinking of about a 48+ inch length and a 10-12 inch beam. Now I am considering 24-36 inch length and as wide a beam I can find for stability (and space to work)
If plans go astray, I will have less invested in this experiment. My biggest concern is the reliability of the wireless network. I will spend a lot of time testing that before I have to figure out how to put it in the boat.
The second concern is water proofing. I have built model boats and know I have to seal the electronics from the moisture. I am using an experiment board for now. Next step for installation in the boat will be a prototype board. This will provide permanently soldered components and connections. It will also be larger than a custom designed circuit. I do not know exactly what size the prototype board will be. I have a general idea from the boards I know that are available. So that is why I think I can downsize the model.
The truth I have considered is the first test vessel can be a very simple and crude “pointy box” with a motor and rudder. Ugly yes, but a consideration. I’d rather have a scale model looking test bed for the pictures, but I can be practical if I want or need to be.
When I get to GPS and other enhancements, then I will have to go to a larger test platform. Perhaps then I will include dual motor controls. Fun to think about but first things first.
I’m a Hack
I am starting to think of how many ways I can use the micro computers in monitoring and control situations. They can be set up to have their own network IP address and webpage, at least on the home network. It’s called the Spinneret Web Server. Not sure that I would want to make my data available to the world, at least not at this time.
There are just so many wonderful options that these controls can be set up to manage. I’m sure there is a business opportunity somewhere in designing and deploying these devices. I certainly will be finding and deploying my own beyond the RoboBoat Project.
I have returned to my first love of working with computer CPU’s (Central Processing Units). Back when I started there was nothing but assembly. I was working in machine language just trying to make LEDs blink in sequence. Much later on I was writing ham radio terminal programs in MS Basic on the Apple MAC computer. Getting the random serial streams to decode and display properly (using BASIC) was a real challenge. Somehow I got it working very well.
I enjoyed writing computer code for the control system (I/Net) that my real job (office building control systems) allowed. I became involved just as the code writing was evolving from the DOS environment into a higher generation language. Most of the “old boys” didn’t trust the new interpreters. They wanted to stick with DOS. Ha! I had to learn both methods.
I enjoy the process of writing code that works closely with the fundamental CPU process of the computer. I like it more than running a computer application. However, I can live just fine with the simple BASIC interpreters of these computers. Some machine level code (assembly) can be written to speed certain operations. Dedicated hackers (good hackers) can write their entire program in assembly if they desired. Not me, I’ll just give it a poke when I have to. Assembly is just TOO much detail.
The higher power Propeller computer uses a language called SPIN. But that system also recommends Assembly when needed for speed. There are lots of options to fit any need. I love it!
Heck, I may never get the boat built. Not true, I am on a mission there. I’d love to have the boat running simply as the reason to experiment with the programming. And also have something truly unique with which almost no one else is experimenting.
Stand back! You may get injured in all the hacking going on.