DOCSLIB.ORG

Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Program INEL-96/0080-Qtr 1 Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Program Site Operator Program Quarterly Progress Report for October through December 1995 (First Quarter of Fiscal Year 1996) J.E. Francfort 1 R.R. Bassett2 S. Briasco3 W. Culliton4 E.F. Duffy5 R.A. Emmert 6 J.R. Hague7 R. Hobbs8 B. Johnson9 I.J. Kakwan10 S. Neal11 L. Stefanakos 12 T.G. Ware13 Published March 1996 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Lockheed-Martin Idaho Technologies Company Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE) Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract No. DE-AC07-94ID13223 1 INEL/Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies 8 Arizona Public Service 2 Sandia National Laboratories 9 Potomac Electric Power Company 3 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power 10 Texas A&M University 4 Orcas Power & Light Company 11 Pacific Gas & Electric Company 5 Potomac Electric Power Company 12 University of South Florida 6 Platte River Power Authority 13 Southern California Edison Company 7 Kansas State University Executive Summary The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Site Operator Program was initially established to meet the requirements of the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976. The Program has since evolved in response to new legislation and interests. Its mission now includes three major activity categories: Advancement of Electric Vehicle (EV) technologies Development of infrastructure elements needed to support significant EV use Increasing public awareness and acceptance of EVs. The 11 Site Operator Program participants, their geographic locations, and the principal thrusts of their efforts are identified in Table ES-1. The EV inventories of the site operators totals about 250 vehicles. The individual fleets are summarized in Table ES-2. The primary functions of the Program continue to be the collection, analysis, and dissemination of operating and maintenance data; and demonstrations of the technology to promote public awareness. Both efforts have been fruitful; in particular, practical methods and equipment for handling operating data are now in use, and the data is widely available via computer networks. The participants – electric utilities, academic institutions, and Federal agencies – are geographically dispersed within the United States and their vehicles see a broad spectrum of service conditions. The contributions of the first two groups go well beyond the basic Program scope: The utilities have worked towards infrastructure development, battery recharging scenarios, and identification of operation/maintenance problems. Academic institutions have investigated alternative charging technologies (curbside and solar) and have developed a practical mobile data acquisition system. Other contributions are training materials for maintenance and operation, and the field testing of experimental or prototype systems and components. The program participants have generally established working relationships with the industrial community where common interests exist. Experience to date emphasizes problems specific to electric vehicles: Climate effects Battery technology limitations Vehicle conversions versus ground-up design In the context of existing or impending legislative mandates to increase electric vehicle usage for environmental reasons, two national organizations have joined DOE and the major vehicle manufacturers in EV promotion. The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) in America will identify and evaluate alternatives in vehicular technology. EV America, a utility-led program, will conduct performance and evaluation tests to support market development for electric vehicles. ES-1 In addition, DOE, the Department of Transportation, the Electric Transportation Coalition, and the Electric Vehicle Association of the Americas are conducting a series of workshops to encourage urban groups to initiate the policies and infrastructure development necessary to support large-scale demonstrations, and ultimately the mass market use, of electric vehicles. Program redirection in the near and medium term is expected to involve hybrid systems, advanced EVs, add-on or upgraded components, advanced batteries and inputs from PNGV studies. ES-2 Table ES-1. Site Operator Program Participants. Entity Principal Thrusts of Program Effort Arizona Public Service Co. a, b, d Phoenix, AZ Kansas State University a, b, c, d Manhattan, KS Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power a Los Angeles, CA Orcas Power and Light Co. a, b, d Eastsound, WA Pacific Gas and Electric Co. a, b, d San Ramon, CA Platte River Power Authority a, b, d Fort Collins, CO Potomac Electric Power Co. a, b, d Washington, DC Sandia National Laboratory* a Albuquerque, NM Southern California Edison Co. a, b, d Rosemead, CA Texas A&M University a, c, d College Station, TX University of South Florida a, b, c, d Tampa, FL U.S. Navy* a Port Hueneme, CA York Technical College a, b, c, d Rock Hill, SC a. Fleet evaluation, vehicle test c. Technical education b. Infrastructure development d. Public awareness * Sandia and the Navy are not Site Operators, but they do share information with the Site Operator Program, and this information is provided to the reader of this report. ES-3 Table ES-2. Site Operator Program active vehicle inventory. Solectria US Electricar S-10 Force Sedan S-10 G-Van Ecostar TEVan Honda EVcort Others* Total APS 3 1 - 3 4 - 1 - 3 6 21 KSU - - - - - - - - 2 - 2 LADWP - - 4 4 6 - 4 - - 1 19 Orcas - 1 - - - - - - 1 - 2 PG&E - - - 5 3 5 - 5 - - 18 PRPA - - - - - - - - 2 - 2 PEPCO 3 1 - - 1 - - - - - 5 Sandia - - - - - - - - - 12 12 SCE 1 5 10 10 14 12 2 3 - 3 60 Texas - 1 - 3 15 - 9 - - 2 30 Navy 13 - - - 7 - - - - 39 59 USF - - - - 2 - - - - 10 12 York - 1 - 1 1 - - - - 8 11 TOTALS 20 10 14 26 53 17 16 8 8 81 253 * The "Others" category includes various vehicle models, manufacturers, and converters, including: BAT Metro and Ranger, Specialty, Demi TVan, Ford Ranger, Venus Ranger, Griffin, Solar Car, Spartan, Unique, Soleq, Bear Skin, Jet, Volkswagen, Mitsubishi, utility company conversions, and others. It is assumed that these "Other" vehicles, while perhaps provide satisfactory day-to-day operating capabilities to their owners, generally have been and will be of limited production, and they do not represent the future electric vehicle market in the United States. ES-4 Acknowledgement The principle author thanks each of the Site Operator participants for their input, active participation, and timely comments in the form of their quarterly reports. The Site Operator Program report incorporates text and data from the quarterly reports that each of the Site Operator participants submit. Because of the significant amount of text that is draw from each of the individual Site Operator's reports, each of the individual Site Operators are listed as co- authors. However, any errors, emissions, or inaccuracies are the singular responsibility of the principle author. J.E. Francfort iii iv Contents Executive Summary .................................................... ES-1 Introduction .............................................................. 1 Program Experience Overview .............................................. 7 Electric Vehicle Testing Results ............................................. 11 Site Operators Activities ................................................... 17 Arizona Public Service .............................................. 19 Kansas State University .............................................. 21 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power ............................ 23 Orcas Power and Light Company ...................................... 27 Pacific Gas and Electric Company ..................................... 27 Platte River Power Authority .......................................... 31 Potomac Electric Power Company ..................................... 34 Sandia National Laboratory ........................................... 35 Southern California Edison ........................................... 36 Texas A&M University .............................................. 40 U.S. Navy ........................................................ 42 University of South Florida ........................................... 44 York Technical College .............................................. 52 Energy Economics of Electric Vehicles ........................................ 55 v Introduction The Site Operator Program was initially established by the Department of Energy (DOE) to incorporate the electric vehicle activities dictated by the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, Development and Demonstration Act of 1976. In the ensuing years, the Program has evolved in response to new legislation and interests. The Program currently includes eleven sites located in diverse geographic, meteorological, and metropolitan areas across the United States. Information is shared reciprocally with two additional sites (U.S. Navy and Sandia National Laboratory) that not under Program contract or control. The Mission Statement of the Site Operator Program includes three major activities: Advancement of electric vehicle technologies Development of infrastructure elements necessary to support significant electric vehicle use; and Increasing the awareness and acceptance of electric vehicles (EVs) by the public. The current participants in the Site Operator Program and their locations are shown in Figure 1, while Table 1 details the types of EVs in each of the Site Operator fleets.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Canada's Cup Years
    The Canada i!ii Cup Years ~m 31 THE ROCHESTER YACHT CLUB " 1877 - 2000 Th~ time the Chicago Yacht Club, Columbia Yacht Club of Chicago, 10( THE TURN OF THE ~wo Detroit Cltlbs, alld tile Rocheste, Yacht Club had ,11ade their bids. It was thought fair to give an American Lake Ontario yach! CENTURY c,<,b the preference and RYC won. The years between the founding of Rochester Yacht Club in 1902 1877 and about 1910 are described as Golden Years. Membership had grown froln the original 46 charter members to Each club built one boat under a new rule adopted in 1902 in 318. A personal insight on the scene in the harbor just after the the 40-foot class chosen by P, CYC. A long bowsprit brought turn of the century was obtained fi’om Past Commodore John the Canadian boat, to be named Stralh{’oIla, to 61 feet long. Van Voorhis. Van Voorhis’ father would take him to dinner at theRYC had mustered a syndicate consisting of Hiram W. Sibley, West Side Clubhouse and they would look out on the river fiom James S. Watson, Thomas N. Finucane, Arthur G. Yates. John the porch and his father told him: N. Beckley, Albert O. Fenn, Walter B. Duffy, and Charles M. Everest. The group settled on a design by William Gardner, to Twenty to 30 sailboats were moored, mostly on be built at the Wood Boatyard in City Island, N.Y. The the east side of lhe river belween lhe Naval Iromh, quoil measured 65 feet overall. 40 t~et on the waterline, and had a beam of 12.5 feet with a draft of 0 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Valid List Sorted by Base Handicap
    Date: 10/19/2012 2012 Valid List Sorted by Base Handicap Page 1 of 30 This Valid List is to be used to verify an individual boat's handicap, and valid date, and should not be used to establish handicaps for any other boats not listed. Please review the appilication form, handicap adjustments, boat variants and modified boat list reports to understand the many factors including the fleet handicapper observations that are considered by the handicap committee in establishing a boat's handicap Yacht Design Last Name First Name Yacht Name Fleet Date Sail Number Base Racing Cruising R P 90 David George Rambler NEW2 R021912 25556 -171 -171 -156 J/V I R C 66 Meyers Daniel Numbers MHD2 R012912 119 -132 -132 -120 C T M 66 Carlson Gustav Aurora NEW2 N081412 50095 -99 -99 -90 I R C 52 Fragomen Austin Interlodge SMV2 N072412 5210 -84 -84 -72 T P 52 Swartz James Vesper SMV2 C071912 52007 -84 -87 -72 Farr 50 O' Hanley Ron Privateer NEW2 N072412 50009 -81 -81 -72 Andrews 68 Burke Arthur D Shindig NBD2 R060412 55655 -75 -75 -66 Chantier Naval Goldsmith Mat Sejaa NEW2 N042712 03 -75 -75 -63 Ker 55 Damelio Michael Denali MHD2 R031912 55 -72 -72 -60 Maxi Kiefer Charles Nirvana MHD2 R041812 32323 -72 -72 -60 Tripp 65 Academy Mass Maritime Prevail MRN2 N032212 62408 -72 -72 -60 Custom Schotte Richard Isobel GOM2 R062712 60295 -69 -69 -57 Custom Anderson Ed Angel NEW2 R020312 CAY-2 -57 -51 -36 Merlen 49 Hill Hammett Defiance NEW2 N020812 IVB 4915 -42 -42 -30 Swan 62 Tharp Twanette Glisse SMV2 N071912 -24 -18 -6 Open Class 50 Harris Joseph Gryphon Soloz NBD2
    [Show full text]
  • 'Development of a Vpp Based Rating for J-Class Yachts'
    ‘Development of a Vpp based rating for J-Class Yachts’ Clay Oliver, Yacht Research International, and John Robinson, Wolfson Unit MTIA. Abstract The J-Class was originally one of a number of level rating classes, developed under the ‘Universal Rule’, rating at 76 feet. The class was designated for each of the three America’s Cup series from 1930 to 1937. Most of the yachts were either scrapped or laid up at the end of the 1930’s, but more recently interest in the class has revived. Following refits and restorations, and one complete rebuild, there is now a class association and interest in further builds is strong, with two new boats already well into construction and fit out. For several years, the J-Class Association has run regattas based upon a Time Correction Factor (TCF) calculated using the standard WinDesign Velocity Prediction Program (Vpp). In 2007, the Association transferred the operation of this rating system to the Wolfson Unit both as a measure of independence and further to refine the process. The form and proportion of the J-Class contrast dramatically with those of the modern yachts which have largely driven developments in VPP hydrodynamic formulations in recent years. This paper describes the some new formulations geared specifically to the J-Class yacht, and generally applicable to the traditional yacht. The fact that the keel and hull of the traditional yacht cannot be rationally delineated is an issue and an approach to obviate this problem is described. Data from 1936 towing tank experiments of 1/24th and 1/8th-scale J-Class models are reanalyzed for new J-Class Vpp formulations.
    [Show full text]
  • History America's Cup & J-Class
    h i s t o r y America’s Cup & J-Class The tradition of America’s Cup races began in 1851 when the schooner America defeated 15 British yachts to win the Round the Island Race in Cowes. Between then and the Second World War, races for the America’s Cup were held on 16 occasions. Leading businessmen such as Sir Thomas Lipton, Thomas Sopwith and Harold S. Vanderbilt went to extremes and spent huge sums of money in order to try and win the ornate trophy known affectionately as the Old Mug. Those who succeeded took on the role of defender, waiting until the other J-Classers determined who would be the next challenger. Due to the high stakes and immense public interest the fight was not always fair, and many protests had to be evaluated by the New York Yacht Club. In these days the America’s Cup remained a battle between J-Class yachts competed for the America’s Cup in 1930, Rainbow, Endeavour, Ranger, American and British yachts. After the Universal Rule was 1934 and 1937. Although the America’s Cup recommenced Endeavour II and Yankee compete established in 1930 the participants were J-Class yachts in the 1950s, the heyday of the J-Class was over and it in the 1937 preliminary race with a waterline length from 75 to 87 feet and a draught of would be more than a half a century before they raced up to 15 feet. It was this Universal Rule, developed by Nat again. The majestic yachts of the 1930s were either Herreshoff, which established a J-Class with more or less scrapped or used as house boats in the mud of the Hamble similar yachts categorised in one class.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Type by Aircraft Make with ICAO Codes Current 10/08/2016
    Aircraft Type by Aircraft Make with ICAO Codes Current 10/08/2016 AircraftClass AircraftTypeICAOCode AircraftMake AircraftModel AircraftSeries AircraftClass AircraftTypeICAOCode AircraftMake AircraftModel AircraftSeries FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AJ27 ACAC ARJ21 700 FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE CUB2 ACES HIGH CUBY NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE SACR ACRO ADVANCED NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE A700 ADAM A700 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE A500 ADAM A500 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE F26T AERMACCHI SF260 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE M326 AERMACCHI MB326 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE M308 AERMACCHI MB308 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE LA60 AERMACCHI AL60 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AAT3 AERO AT3 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AB11 AERO BOERO AB115 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AB18 AERO BOERO AB180 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AC52 AERO COMMANDER 520 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AC50 AERO COMMANDER 500 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AC72 AERO COMMANDER 720 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AC6L AERO COMMANDER 680 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE AC56 AERO COMMANDER 560 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE M200 AERO COMMANDER 200 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE JCOM AERO COMMANDER 1121 NO MASTER SERIES ASSIGNED FIXED WING ‐ AIRPLANE VO10 AERO COMMANDER 100 NO MASTER
    [Show full text]
  • 2020Yearbook
    2020 Yearbook Columbia Sailing Club Founded July 17, 1957 Furthering interest and activities in Sailing in central South Carolina since 1957 CLUB BURGEE CLUB DEVICE Mailing Address Physical Address PO Box 922 292 Shuler Road Columbia SC 29202 Columbia SC 29212 34°03’51.06”N 81°13’41.79”W Phone 803-781-4518 Club US Sailing Number 102725I Website www.columbiasailingclub.org The yearbook is for the use of CSC members only. The personal information contained in it is not intended to be used for non-CSC mailings or emails. Editors – Will Haltiwanger, Curt Rone and Rich Horton Cover – Stephanie Copple Club Device (shown above) – Illustrated by Jim Edwards ii Home to these Fleets J/24 Fleet 67 JY-15 Fleet 47 Laser – Part of District 12 Lightning Fleet 440 MC Scow Fleet 65 S2 7.9 Fleet 24 San Juan 21 Fleet 31 Sunfish Fleet 670 Y-Flyer Fleet 16 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CSC Officers, Board of Stewards, Membership Committee, Committee Chairs ... 1 CSC Auxiliary Board and Committee Chairs .......................................................... 2 Past Commodores and Past CSC Auxiliary Presidents ......................................... 3 Special Club Awards .............................................................................................. 4 Fee Schedule.......................................................................................................... 8 Club Rules and Guidelines ..................................................................................... 9 Back Cove Rules .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Old Ships and Ship-Building Days of Medford 1630-1873
    OLD SHIPS AND SHIP-BUILDING DAYS OF MEDFORD 1630-1873 By HALL GLEASON WEST MEDFORD, MASS. 1936 -oV Q. co U © O0 •old o 3 § =a « § S5 O T3». Sks? r '■ " ¥ 5 s<3 H " as< -,-S.s« «.,; H u « CxJ S Qm § -°^ fc. u§i G rt I Uh This book was reproduced by the Medford Co-operative Bank. January 1998 Officers Robert H. Surabian, President & CEO Ralph W. Dunham, Executive Vice President Henry T. Sampson, Jr., Senior Vice President Thomas Burke, Senior Vice President Deborah McNeill, Senior Vice President John O’Donnell, Vice President John Line, Vice President Annette Hunt, Vice President Sherry Ambrose, Assistant Vice President Pauline L. Sampson, Marketing & Compliance Officer Patricia lozza, Mortgage Servicing Officer Directors John J. McGlynn, Chairman of the Board Julie Bemardin John A. Hackett Richard M. Kazanjian Dennis Raimo Lorraine P. Silva Robert H. Surabian CONTENTS. Chapter Pagf. I. Early Ships 7 II. 1800-1812 . 10 III. War of 1812 19 IV. 1815-1850 25 V. The Pepper Trade 30 VI. The California Clipper Ship Era . 33 VII. Storms and Shipwrecks . 37 VIII. Development of the American Merchant Vessel 48 IX. Later Clipper Ships 52 X. Medford-Built Vessels . 55 Index 81 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Page Clipper Ship Thatcher Magoun Frontispiece Medford Ship-Builders 7 Yankee Privateer 12 Mary Pollock Subtitle from Kipling’s “Derelict *’ 13 Heave to 20 The Squall . 20 A Whaler 21 Little White Brig 21 Little Convoy 28 Head Seas 28 Ship Lucilla 28 Brig Magoun 29 Clipper Ship Ocean Express 32 Ship Paul Jones” 32 Clipper Ship “Phantom” 32 Bark Rebecca Goddard” 33 Clipper Ship Ringleader” 36 Ship Rubicon 36 Ship Bazaar 36 Ship Cashmere 37 Clipper Ship Herald of the Morning” 44 Bark Jones 44 Clipper Ship Sancho Panza 44 Clipper Ship “Shooting Star 45 Ship “Sunbeam” .
    [Show full text]
  • General Background Study and Historical Base Map, Assateague
    GENERAL BACKGROUND STUDY and HISTORICAL BASE MAP Assateague Island National Seashore Maryland - Virginia By EDWIN C. BEARSS DIVISION OF HISTORY Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation December 18, 1968 ational Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior BASIC DATA STUDY HISTORY Assateague Island National Seashore December 31, 1968 Prepared by Edwin c. Bearss Approved by •oooo•••OOOOO• Regional Director, NE • TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Table of Contents •• $ 0 0 i 0 0 List of Maps and Illustrations Q • 0 0 0 0 ii Foreword iii Chapter I Geographic Setting 1 Chapte.c lI Giovanni ca Verrazzano and Assateague • • 3 Chapter III First Settlements • • • • 7 Chapter IV The Pasturage of Horses and Cattle 0 • 18 Chapter v Inlets 0 0 25 Chapter VI The Life-Saving Service and United States Coast Guard • • • • • 0 34 Chapter VII Assateague Light 48 Chapter VIII German Submarines off Assateague • 59 Chapter IX Villages and Communities 0 80 Chapter X Economic Activities Other Than Livestock Raising and Hunting • • • • • • • • 91 Chapter XI The Extension of the Hook at Toms Cove . • 98 Chapter XII Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge •• • 0 0 100 Chapter XIII Assateague Island National Seashore •• 0 0 101 Appendix A Reports of Assistance • • • 0 0 0 0 0 • 102 Appendix B Vessels Destroyed by U-151 • 0 0 128 Appendix C List of Classified Structures • 0 • 131 Appendix D Land Classification •• • 134 Bibliography 000000000 0 0 136 i LIST OF MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE Following Bibliography I Historical Base Map--Assateague National Seashore II North
    [Show full text]
  • SEAFARING WOMEN: an Investigation of Material Culture for Potential Archaeological Diagnostics of Women on Nineteenth-Century Sailing Ships
    SEAFARING WOMEN: An Investigation of Material Culture for Potential Archaeological Diagnostics of Women on Nineteenth-Century Sailing Ships by R. Laurel Seaborn April, 2014 Director of Thesis/Dissertation: Dr. Lynn Harris Major Department: Department of History, Program in Maritime Studies ABSTRACT During the 19th century, women went to sea on sailing ships. Wives and family accompanied captains on their voyages from New England. They wrote journals and letters that detailed their life on board, adventures in foreign ports, and feelings of separation from family left behind. Although the women kept separate from the sailors as class and social status dictated, they contributed as nannies, nurses and navigators when required. Examination of the historical documents, ship cabin plans, and photos of those interiors, as well as looking at surviving ships, such as the whaleship Charles W. Morgan, provided evidence of the objects women brought and used on board. The investigation from a gendered perspective of the extant material culture, and shipwreck site reports laid the groundwork for finding potential archaeological diagnostics of women living on board. SEAFARING WOMEN: An Investigation of Material Culture for Potential Archaeological Diagnostics of Women on Nineteenth-Century Sailing Ships A Thesis/Dissertation Presented To the Faculty of the Department of Department Name Here East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by R. Laurel Seaborn April, 2014 © R. Laurel Seaborn, 2014 SEAFARING WOMEN: An Investigation of Material Culture for Potential Archaeological Diagnostics of Women on Nineteenth-Century Sailing Ships by R. Laurel Seaborn APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF THESIS:_________________________________________________________ Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Annals Section4 Yachts.Pdf
    CHAPTER 4 Early Yachts IN THE R.V.Y.C. FROM 1903 TO ABOUT 1933 The following list of the first sail yachts in the Club cannot be said to be complete, nevertheless it provides a record of the better known vessels and was compiled from newspaper files of The Province, News-Advertiser, The World and The Sun during the first three decades of the Club activities. Vancouver newspapers gave very complete coverage of sailing events in that period when yacht racing commanded wide public interest. ABEGWEIT—32 ft. aux. Columbia River centerboard cruising sloop built at Steveston in 1912 for H. C. Shaw, who joined the Club in 1911. ADANAC-18 ft. sloop designed and built by Horace Stone in 1910. ADDIE—27 ft. open catboat sloop built in 1902 for Bert Austin at Vancouver Shipyard by William Watt, the first yacht constructed at the yard. Addie was in the original R.V.Y.C. fleet. ADELPIII—44 ft. schooner designed by E. B. Schock for Thicke brothers. Built 1912, sailed by the Thicke brothers till 1919 when sold to Bert Austin, who sold it in 1922 to Seattle. AILSA 1-28.5 ft. D class aux. yawl, Mower design. Built 1907 by Bob Granger, originally named Ta-Meri. Subsequent owners included Ron Maitland, Tom Ramsay, Alan Leckie, Bill Ball and N. S. McDonald. AILSA II—22.5 ft. D class aux. yawl built 1911 by Bob Granger. Owners included J. H. Willard and Joe Wilkinson. ALEXANDRA-45 ft. sloop designed for R.V.Y.C. syndicate by William Fyfe of Fairlie, Scotland and built 1907 by Wm.
    [Show full text]
  • Fig. 49 J Class Replicas and New Constructions Since 2000
    Year Lwl No. Sail-no. Name Designer/Builder First owner L in ft Remarks buit in ft Sparkman & Stephens and 11 2003 J5 Ranger Reichel/Pugh (USA) / Danish John A. Williams 87 136 Replica of Ranger (77-C) Yachts, Skagen DK Dykstra & Partners / Royal 12 2009 JK6 Hanuman James H. Clark 90 138 Replica of Endeavour II Huisman NL JH1 unbuilt 1937 Ranger Design by Starling 13 2010 Lionheart Hoek Design / Claasen NL 87 142 H1 Burgess and Olin Stephens (77-F) Not realized Frank C. Paine design of 1935 Hoek Design / Holland 14 ? J7 Atlantis 88 140 ("A"), former Atlantis hull, completed at Jachtbouw NL Bloemsma in 2008. (see below No. 19) Dykstra & Partners / Holland 15 2012 JH2 Rainbow Chris Gongriep 88 131 Replica of Rainbow , launched feb. 2012 Jachtbouw NL Dykstra & Partners / Holland Simon Dierdorp Replica of Yankee , under construction since 16 ? JH3 Yankee 88 128 Jachtbouw NL Syndikat, Niederlande 2010, but no news since then. Design of 1937 by Thore Anton Holm. Hull 17 2017 J-S1 Svea Hoek Design / Vitters NL Consortium 87 136 by Bloemsma NL. Replica of Enterprise. In planning stage 18 ? J4 Enterprise Hoek Design 80 127 (2012), no news since then. Former Atlantis hull (see above No. 14). Hoek Design / Holland Not realized Frank C. Paine design of 1935 19 2015 J8 Topaz Dutch owner 88 140 Jachtbouw NL ("A"), since 2012 construction to be completed at Holland Jachtbouw. Unbuilt 1937 Ranger Design by Starling Sparkman & Stephens / Burgess and Olin Stephens (77-B). 20 ? J1 Cheveyo US flag 87 139 Spirit Yachts UK Construction started in 2012 at Spirit Yachts UK, but not confirmed.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Breed of J-Class for a New Era of J-Class Racing
    A NEW BREED OF J-CLASS FOR A NEW ERA OF J-CLASS RACING A NEW BREED OF J-CLASS FOR A NEW ERA OF J-CLASS RACING SHE IS THE largesT SUPER-J EVER TO BE LAUncHED wiTH OPTIMISED design for acHIEVing LINE HonoURS LIONHEART J–CLASS H1 A historY OF EXCELLENCE Thomas Sopwith (Sopwith Aviation Company) funded, Laying the Keel of Endeavour II in 1936. organised and helmed the yachts The men are ladling lead that will go Endeavour in 1934 (nearly winning) and into the 90-ton keel. Endeavour II in 1937. a history of excellence The most advanced and most powerful thoroughbred Only 10 J-Class yachts were designed and built J-Class yachts required enormous crews and, despite sailing yachts of their day, the J-Class was adopted for during the 1930’s. Several yachts of closely related expert attention to their technical details, still broke an the America’s Cup competition in 1928. The Class dimensions, mostly 23-Metre International Rule boats, astonishing number of masts. While they were in most itself dates back to the turn of the century when the were converted after their construction to meet the regards the most advanced and most powerful Universal Rule was adopted. This used a yacht’s rating rules of the J-Class but only the purpose-built thoroughbred sailing yachts ever to have been built, various dimensions to calculate an equivalent rating in Cup yachts could compete in the America’s Cup. the glorious J’s proved too extravagant for their own feet so vessels of varying lengths and sail size could good and most had limited sailing careers outside of compete against one another without the need to the America’s Cup - RANGER, whose 1937 cost was make allowances for time or distance sailed.
    [Show full text]