Absolute Control


Dave Bingham is the proud owner of "Bingo", a 70-foot custom motoryacht
designed by Brian Holland and produced by Oviatt Marine Group. "Bingo" can be
considered one of the more impressive vessels in its class. ("Bingo" was the
Seattle Yacht Club flagship for the 2004 Opening Day Parade.) Dave is
fastidious, to put it mildly, about the condition of his vessel. A speck of
dirt would never find a soul mate on "Bingo", and a scratch would be out of the
question. Dave sets a very high standard for the appearance and condition of
his boat.

"Nobody realizes what this boat is about," said Dave. "It's the result of two
years of Brian and I working closely together. I went to the Fort Lauderdale
Boat Show five years in a row, and I've never seen anything like this. Brian is
a master designer, that's for sure. He'd call me up in the middle of the night
and we'd talk boat design. There isn't another boat that does what this one
does, anywhere."

Dave Bingham is passionate about his gorgeous yacht, and has put nothing but
the finest systems and equipment aboard.

When not cruising throughout the Pacific Northwest, "Bingo" is moored at a
private dock in front of Bingham's waterfront home. Dave backs her down between
two finger piers, in a space just barely wider than her beam, and often with a
strong breeze on the port side. Dave routinely performs this maneuver
single-handed, and as if that weren't impressive in and of itself, he is
typically 25-feet feet or more removed from the shifter and thruster controls
while he is backing into the slip!

Dave's experience defies everything we're supposed to "know" about handling
70-footers. Yachts over 50 or 60-feet are often considered too large to be
handled by couple, and it is not unheard of for boaters to hire a deckhand to
assist. Some boaters would be more comfortable hiring a professional skipper to
run a 70-footer, primarily for the challenges of close quarter operation. It is
certainly uncommon for a recreational yachtsman to single-hand a 70-footer, and
even more uncommon to make it look as easy as docking a 16-foot runabout.

Dave has a secret, of course, and we enthusiastically accepted an invitation to
learn more about the technology that allows Dave Bingham to dock "Bingo" so
very easily.

"Bingo" has both bow and stern thrusters, as well as twin engines with
electronic controls. The shifters and the thrusters are all controlled by a
wireless remote control unit, smaller than a deck of cards, that hangs from a
lanyard around Dave's neck. The system is known as a "Yacht Controller," and is
represented in the Pacific Northwest by John Munroe of Ocean Currents Marine
Electric.

We asked John Munroe about the product.

"We can hook the Yacht Controller to any electronic engine controls. If a
boater wants to upgrade from manual to electronic controls we can do that too,
and it runs about another $5000 for dual engines. The thrusters are really easy
to hook up because there's a joystick station, and that's usually a three-wire
station so we can hook right in. The wireless remote communicates with a
receiver, and we connect the receiver to the control heads either on the
flybridge or at the lower helm. The receiver sends "ahead" and "astern"
commands to the shifters. It takes just about all day to hook one of these up,
and that installation service is free when a boater buys a Yacht Controller."

John removed the thruster control joysticks and showed us a complex circuit
board that allowed the Yacht Controller to operate the thrusters. Professional
installation of the product would seem extremely important.

"We range check every installation," said John Munroe, "and we find the
transmitter is always good for about 200 feet. It would be possible, but not
smart or legal, to operate the boat with nobody aboard. If for any reason the
signal should be interrupted, the controls automatically return to neutral."

We asked, "What happens if the boater next door has a Yacht Controller, and he
or she is trying to send a different set of wireless commands at the same
time?"

"There are about 65,000 possible digital frequencies. It would be virtually
impossible for another unit to be coincidentally set to the same frequency on a
neighboring boat."

We asked about reliability.

"This is the same chip that Boeing uses for remote control cranes, and it is
used in hundreds of other remote control industrial applications as well. This
is a high quality, industrial technology that has been adapted for the yachting
world. I've installed five of these systems in the local area so far, and you
can be sure I'd be the first to know if anybody were having a problem. We
haven't had a failure yet, and I don't expect any.
Even so, it's reassuring to know that the boat will simply go to neutral if
something ever did go wrong."

We asked Dave Bingham about his experience with the system.

"I've had the Yacht Controller since the beginning of summer. We were out
cruising for about two months. It got to the point where I did almost every
docking with the Yacht Controller. I originally bought it because I have to
back into this dock and there's only about a foot and a half on either side.
Visibility aft from either station is restricted.
With the Yacht Controller, I can move back to the aft deck and still maintain
full control."

"I've been extremely pleased with the Yacht Controller," continued Dave. "It
has solved a huge problem. I was originally going to put stern controls on the
boat, and that would have been about $7000 just for the engine controls alone.
I would have needed to bring thruster controls aft as well, and that would have
been a lot of money too. If I had stern controls for backing, I wouldn't be
able to see what was going on up at the front of the boat."

Dave observed that once the boat is in the slip, he can carry the Yacht
Controller onto the dock to assist in securing lines. "If the bow starts to
blow off, I just bring it back in. It can be very difficult to man handle a
boat this size. The Yacht Controller makes it possible for me to take the boat
out by myself, and I often do."

The proof of a pudding is in the eating, so Dave fired up "Bingo" for a brief
demonstration. The wind had set "Bingo" against her starboard fenders, and
snugged up the port mooring lines. Dave touched the thruster controls on the
transmitter, and "Bingo" moved to port in her slip to release the tension on
the lines. Dave tossed the slackened lines from their cleats, and walked back
to the covered aft deck. "Bingo" began moving out into the lake.

"I've freaked a few people out," grinned Dave. "They can't figure out who's
driving the boat!"

Dave watched carefully as "Bingo" eased between the finger piers. When the wind
began pushing her back to starboard again, a deft touch of the transmitter
caused her to sidestep back to the center of the slip. After clearing the slip
by about 50 yards, Dave put "Bingo" in reverse and began approaching his slip
again.

"I'm a slow docker," said Dave. "I'm the guy who wants everything perfect, and
nobody can keep it that way but me." Dave stood on the aft deck, keeping a wary
eye on the approaching dock. After we entered the slip, he glanced forward
several times to be sure that "Bingo" wasn't being blown to one side by the
wind.

We entered and left the slip in perfect, fully controlled form. Once in
position, Dave used the Yacht Controller to shift "Bingo" ever so slightly to
allow us to refasten her mooring lines. The Yacht Controller offered absolute
control, absolutely as represented.

The weekend after we visited with Dave Bingham and John Munroe, we happened to
dock very near "Bingo" at the Port of Poulsbo. Dave had put his boat at the
head of a fairway, in a space just barely large enough to accommodate the
craft. During the weekend, several dock walkers commented on "Bingo's" bristol
appearance and impressive lines. More than a few wondered aloud, "How did he
get that great big boat in here? He must have had to come in sideways!"

There's a very good chance he did just exactly that.

On 05 Oct 2004 04:30:05 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Absolute Control

~~ snippity snip ~~

The weekend after we visited with Dave Bingham and John Munroe, we happened to
dock very near "Bingo" at the Port of Poulsbo. Dave had put his boat at the
head of a fairway, in a space just barely large enough to accommodate the
craft. During the weekend, several dock walkers commented on "Bingo's" bristol
appearance and impressive lines. More than a few wondered aloud, "How did he
get that great big boat in here? He must have had to come in sideways!"

There's a very good chance he did just exactly that.

Great article - very interesting.

I'm curious about something though. With the advent of digital FM
transmission in the GHz range available to these devices, it would
appear that the system developers may have overlooked the concept of
RFI. I know here in the house, I had to change the wireless network
to 5.2 GHz because we purchased a three new 2.4 Ghz phones - didn't
even occur to me and I used to do this kind of thing for a living.

Think of it this way. If a broadband FM RFI source (which is not as
impossible as you might think - a wireless computer or wi-fi system
for instance) is close aboard to the vessel, Dave might find his boat
uncontrollable. FM has a phenomena called capture effect - it's like
driving in your car listening to one FM station and it is overridden
by a different FM station and then back to the original station -
that's capture effect - a stronger signal overriding a weaker signal.
It's not a question of digital controls, it's a question of a stronger
signal hammering a weaker one.

All of which is a long winded way to ask have they taken into account
a localized, strong FM RFI source with their controller?

Did you happen to ask about that?

Later,

Tom

All of which is a long winded way to ask have they taken into account
a localized, strong FM RFI source with their controller?

Did you happen to ask about that?



Yes, but I didn't include it in the article because it was more technical than
a lot of people would appreciate, myself included.

There is a "check sum" signal that is continuously broadcast betweeen the
transmitter and the receiver. I'm not an electronics whiz, but it was explained
to me that this allows the receiver to verify the source of the signal and
allows the transmitter to confirm that the signal is being received. The
transmitter makes a beeping noise if the confirmation signal from the receiver
should ever stop.

I surmise that in layman's terms this probably means that if a device
accidentally broadcast on the same 1 in 65,000 digital frequencies that the
transmitter uses, nothing would happen because the transmitter wouldn't be able
to
communicate with the device to "confirm" the instructions.......but that's my
asumption, not an established fact.

On 05 Oct 2004 15:09:34 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

All of which is a long winded way to ask have they taken into account
a localized, strong FM RFI source with their controller?

Did you happen to ask about that?



Yes, but I didn't include it in the article because it was more technical than
a lot of people would appreciate, myself included.

There is a "check sum" signal that is continuously broadcast betweeen the
transmitter and the receiver. I'm not an electronics whiz, but it was explained
to me that this allows the receiver to verify the source of the signal and
allows the transmitter to confirm that the signal is being received. The
transmitter makes a beeping noise if the confirmation signal from the receiver
should ever stop.

I surmise that in layman's terms this probably means that if a device
accidentally broadcast on the same 1 in 65,000 digital frequencies that the
transmitter uses, nothing would happen because the transmitter wouldn't be able
to
communicate with the device to "confirm" the instructions.......but that's my
asumption, not an established fact.

Well, that's sort of what I was getting at, but I was addressing an
overriding strong source signal that would blank out any input from
the controller. To wit: Anybody with a 2.4 Ghz cordless digital
telephone can't use a 2.4Ghz wireless controller in their residence
because the phone will overide, by it's very nature, the signal from
the wireless network transmitter. It's a difference of 1/2 watt vs
..001 watt.

The check sum is a method by which the receiver can verify that the
signal is being sent by the companion controller, but in the scenario
I am talking about, the receiver can't receive any commands because
the single point RFI is covering the digital signal.

A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

Take care.

Tom

"The beatings will stop when morale improves."
E. Teach, 1717

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On 05 Oct 2004 15:09:34 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

All of which is a long winded way to ask have they taken into account
a localized, strong FM RFI source with their controller?

Did you happen to ask about that?



Yes, but I didn't include it in the article because it was more technical than
a lot of people would appreciate, myself included.

There is a "check sum" signal that is continuously broadcast betweeen the
transmitter and the receiver. I'm not an electronics whiz, but it was explained
to me that this allows the receiver to verify the source of the signal and
allows the transmitter to confirm that the signal is being received. The
transmitter makes a beeping noise if the confirmation signal from the receiver
should ever stop.

I surmise that in layman's terms this probably means that if a device
accidentally broadcast on the same 1 in 65,000 digital frequencies that the
transmitter uses, nothing would happen because the transmitter wouldn't be able
to
communicate with the device to "confirm" the instructions.......but that's my
asumption, not an established fact.

Well, that's sort of what I was getting at, but I was addressing an
overriding strong source signal that would blank out any input from
the controller. To wit: Anybody with a 2.4 Ghz cordless digital
telephone can't use a 2.4Ghz wireless controller in their residence
because the phone will overide, by it's very nature, the signal from
the wireless network transmitter. It's a difference of 1/2 watt vs
.001 watt.

The check sum is a method by which the receiver can verify that the
signal is being sent by the companion controller, but in the scenario
I am talking about, the receiver can't receive any commands because
the single point RFI is covering the digital signal.

A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

Take care.

Tom

"The beatings will stop when morale improves."
E. Teach, 1717




All this high-tech nonsense...I can hit the dock anytime I want...eyes
open or closed.

--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:09:17 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

~~ snippage ~~

All this high-tech nonsense...I can hit the dock anytime I want...eyes
open or closed.

LOL!!

I can too - I don't, but I can.

Later,

Tom
-----------
"Angling may be said to be so
like the mathematics that it
can never be fully learnt..."

Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 15:59:22 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

===============================================

I don't know for sure but I'd bet that they did. There are some
tremendously sophisticated remote control systems on the market these
days, 100 ton travel lifts for example, this docking system for
another, and robotic airplanes. When you are talking about large,
powerful and expensive equipment, reliability and the ability to "fail
safe" have got to be the number one design priorities. It is
relatively easy in the digital age to engineer a communications
protocol that constantly checks on both directions of transmission and
sounds an alarm (stops the equipment) if the link fails for any
reason.

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 20:39:41 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 15:59:22 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

===============================================

I don't know for sure but I'd bet that they did. There are some
tremendously sophisticated remote control systems on the market these
days, 100 ton travel lifts for example, this docking system for
another, and robotic airplanes. When you are talking about large,
powerful and expensive equipment, reliability and the ability to "fail
safe" have got to be the number one design priorities. It is
relatively easy in the digital age to engineer a communications
protocol that constantly checks on both directions of transmission and
sounds an alarm (stops the equipment) if the link fails for any
reason.

I can stop cars dead in their tracks with my 160 meter transmitter in
my truck. And if I'm really feeling mean, I use my mobile linear on a
remote tuned antenna. :)

You cannot successfully protect a small, hang-around-your-neck
controller from EMP which is similar to what I'm talking about.

Then again, I reread the article and caught the relevant section, so
the point is mute.

Later,

Tom

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On 05 Oct 2004 15:09:34 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

Take care.


The article states, "If for any reason the signal should be interrupted,
the controls automatically return to neutral." So it would seem they
did think of this and came to the same conclusion as you did about
what to do in that event.

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:31:44 -0400, "Gary Warner"
wrote:


"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .
On 05 Oct 2004 15:09:34 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

A question I would ask would be: If there is an interfering signal
during a command sequence that interfers with the controller's ability
to sent the appropriate command, do the thrust/engine controllers move
to neutral or so they stay locked on the last command?

There are a host of other questions, but that is the most important
one.

I'd bet anything, they didn't think of that scenario. :)

Take care.


The article states, "If for any reason the signal should be interrupted,
the controls automatically return to neutral." So it would seem they
did think of this and came to the same conclusion as you did about
what to do in that event.

Ah, I must have missed that.

It would seem they did then.

Later,

Tom
-----------
"Angling may be said to be so
like the mathematics that it
can never be fully learnt..."

Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653