Great Pelican, yet again, and Michalak's Jukebox2

[alcibiades]

I have the plans for this, and am quite serious about building something of this order in the spring. I would build the 18ft version, and have flush decking and the standard sail configuration.

However, previous threads on this were somewhat disturbing, particularly the remarks of one experienced poster that this was the only boat ever to have frightened him. I do not care to be frightened, and don't want an unforgiving boat. The account given was that there was no progressive resistance to wind induced heel. As the wind pressure rose, the boat heeled, and showed no sign of stopping.

Mine will be sailed off the North Norfolk coast in the UK, basically in the North Sea, and in the Wash, as well as inland on the Broads. So I really cannot have a boat that is on a knife edge of knockdown whenever the wind rises.

As an alternative, I've looked at some Michalak designs. The AF sail model prompted the remark from one builder that he changed it out, because he wanted something he felt safe about taking his wife out in, on a windy day. OK, this is not for me either. Then I look at Jukebox2, which is basically a knockoff of the AS19, and this looks more the part. So this is where I am going at present, towards Jukebox2.

But what I'd really welcome feedback on is, whether the view of the Pelican is correct. Is it really this hair raising? What about the one that sailed to Hawaii? What about the other feedback that praises it as stable and sea worthy and tolerating high winds and fairly rough water? All these accounts cannot be right. Which is more credible, and why?

I like the Pelican design greatly, the room, the simplicity, the solidity of the thing. But I do not want to be either flat over in the North Sea, or with heart in mouth in case. I can see that the relatively narrow bottom might lead to tenderness, but I can't understand why the marked flare does not lead to progressive resistance to heeling.

Look forward to hearing!

[Thorne]

I suspect that the Great Pelican is a much stronger and seaworthy boat than most Michalak designs, particularly those designed for comfortable cruising in protected waters.

You may want to consider a more homegrown design. It is my understanding that the North Sea has a particular set of wave conditions that has created many of the local boats used for the past 200 years or so -- so why not benefit from other's learning? In particular the pram bow of the GP may not work well, but again I'm just basing my guess on an old statement by a British sailor comparing Dutch pram hulls to British sharp-bow designs, where he said that the pram bow might be stopped cold by waves under some conditions.

Let's see what the UK contingent has to say....

[paladin]

The Great Pelican was not designed for those waters. It was designed for San Francisco bay, which at times can be like a confused seaway when the wind blows down the bay.
One of my sons wanted my old Pelican, then a year or so later it was destroyed on the highway...I drew a new hull which was more friendly to the Greater Seattle-Vancouver area where he sails. You might have a local designer make some alterations to the hull which will entail adding a slightly higher displacement bottom/ballast/deeper centerboard to the hull. Then I would think, for it's size, it would be a good boat for the area in which you wish to sail.

[andrewe]

Having sailed on the east coast and a bit in your area, I am curious about your choice. Bluff bow transoms don't sound a great idea, especially in small boats. Are your ideas influenced by quick build times? If so, a long micro might be a good bet. Pretty simple for a good result.Or even the normal Micro, proven cruisers. Look at Selway Fisher for more trad. lines, also fast builds. ( But not quite as fast as the square types).
As for the scared types. There is always one who is unsure of his capabilities rather than the boat's. If several people post worries (Stevenson Weekender) take notice.
Where you are, good windward ability is a plus as is shallow draft. So a centre boarder might be useful. More important is a cuddy that won't take in water if you overdo it, so you get back up.
Short answer is we need a bit more info.
There are much better boats than you are looking at, but they take longer to build. A Cape Cutter 19 is a proper sea boat. But will not be a 'spring build' A Bolger Micro might be. Let us know more.
A

A simple hull is only part of the work. The rig and fit out can around 2/3rds of the build.

[ChaseKenyon]

Brother Paladin

could you give a brief description of the nature of the changes you made. Also IIRC the winds in the subject cruising area are extremely variable and the ability to shorten sail of great importance. Would not an eaasily shortened Junk sail be appropriate for this venue?

BTW glad to see you on here and hope you had a good Christmas time.

Chase

[JimD]

You have a couple designers much closer to home with some very good designs. I'm thinking of Iain Oughtred and Paul Fisher. Iain's boats might be more complex than you're after but Paul has some very simple to build designs you might want to look at http://www.selway-fisher.com/PocketC.htm . Some are even flat bottom although I think you'd be better off with a chine or two.

[JimD]

Brother Paladin

could you give a brief description of the nature of the changes you made. Also IIRC the winds in the subject cruising area are extremely variable and the ability to shorten sail of great importance. Would not an eaasily shortened Junk sail be appropriate for this venue?

BTW glad to see you on here and hope you had a good Christmas time.

Chase

Chuck has generously sent me the lines for Chelaydra. Its vee bottomed and about a foot longer than GP, with the bow transom higher out of the water. I think it woud be perfect with a junk rig.

[Hwyl]

If you follow the UK advice, you might think about the YM senior, originally designed by Kenneth Gibbs and redesigned for stitch and glue by Selway Fisher. The design is supported by Maurice Griffiths society, so that's pretty local http://www.eventides.org.uk/senior.htm#SENIOR .

I'd say John Welsford's Pathfinder trumps all.

[paladin]

Chase...I have printed the plans and the individual frames, the bow is a bit more pointy......will send the full set as soon as I add all the scribblings.....it was designed with the junk rig in mind...I'll send you the junk rig details when I get them finished.

[ChaseKenyon]

Thank you much brother. Here at Lake Sunapee we have one of the hot spots in the US for international Star boats. The Sunapee Yacht Club holding the International finals a few years ago.

On the other hand down lefty's area I used to go out in the early evening after work from Clinton with Dad to teach him sail control, and watch all the race boats. On one weekend down there in Old Saybrook we were out further up towards Mystic and watching the standard 27 to 45 ft ratings rule race boats. A nice forty ft something Junk came out with a three mast rig and just ran by them like they were towing sea anchors. When the racers made the mark bouy the junk turned with them and went wing and wing against the racers down wind spinnakers for a while to prove his point to them. That really showed the racers how slow they were.

So I know a junk rig on the right hull can be exceptionally fast and due to the ease of reefing, the full on low wind sail area can be greater.


I want to develop the rig and show the Marconi folks my stern. Recent racing designs like the Port Townsed with rotatable controlable aerodynamic gaffs have proven as have the Long Island skimmer ice boats that a modern gaff or sheperd's hook gaff can be the fastest kind of sail on many rigs. It creates a high aspect sail effect with a much lower mast and center of effort than a Marconi rig can. I believe the same methods from these types of performance gaffers could be used with a junk rig to add even more sail shape control to the junk rigs already vast sail shape control. THinking of ways to control the rotation of the top two Gaff/battens is where I am headed at this time

Chase

[alcibiades]

This is what Captain Short said:

"Built with a cabin for cruising, you’ll often find this little boat out as far as the Golden Gate on a windy day and, as any West Coast sailor will tell you, this is as rough as inland sailing can get."
"We even heard from one Great Pelican owner who had sailed his modified home-built down the Pacific Coast to San Diego and then, with his wife as crew, crossed to Hawaii. I would never have recommended such a voyage, because I think of the Great Pelican as a weekender for inland or coastal waters, but I am constantly amazed at the voyages the little boat makes, and it is not limited to the West Coast. I had a call recently from an owner who had sailed his Great Pelican from New Brunswick, Canada down to Florida, and a builder in Nova Scotia claims that the boat is ideal for rough coastal waters."

"...She stands up easily in gusty winds without any other ballast than her crew on the weather side of the cockpit..."

An article in Small Boat Journal by an owner speaks of broad reaching in 20mph winds and having a fine time, though with strong weather helm enough to make one need the long tiller. It says that the pram doesn't slap, but simply rides over the waves.

This however is what Earling2 says, and it sounds like the voice of personal experience.

"I was all ga-ga over those boats until I owned one. They probably would make a pretty cool gunkholer but here are what I see as the downsides to that boat:
..... The boat is pretty well balanced and sails surprisingly well given the shoe-box shape, but contrary to what people seem to believe about them, if you don't have plenty of live ballast with you who knows what they're doing, and aren't asleep at the wheel, then you need to make absolutely sure you reef early. You see pictures of Gt. Pelicans in SF Bay, in a stiff breeze--well rest assured those people are skilled. It will go over, and fairly readily in puffy conditions. Very little reserve stability. The (unbelievably) high freeboard makes it seem all safe and cozy... and it IS a huge comfy cockpit. However, being non-self bailing, if you swamp, you're in a world of inconvenience."

and a little later in the same thread

"The Pelican I had did not actually capsize, but it went way way over on its side, and staggered back up in the gusts. (steady around 10, probably 15-20 gusts) I was alone. My body weight was negligible, plus there's no way you can optimally locate your weight. It has such a tremendous amount of freeboard that when it goes over like that, the windward rail pushes your weight to the center of the boat so you're basically like a monkey clinging to a barrel as it rolls underneath you. You find yourself walking on the leeward seat, and then the leeward coaming, rather than being able to heave your weight to the windward rail. There was little-to-no reserve stability in those flared sides--the way a boat that DOES have reserve stability will fetch up at a certain point and refuse to go any further (or round up). The reason is that transom bow and wide aft transom. There's very little curve in the sides compared to a pointy-bowed boat. So as it heels, the boat really isn't rolling any significant midsection into the water, like a "normal" boat, or even a catboat, which loses steerage, becomes asymmetrical, and rounds up. In other words, the transom isn't THAT much wider than the bow. What it's shoving in the water is a fairly straight run of side planking --so the profile of the waterline doesn't generate much extra displacement as it heels. Good for steering, bad for picking up stability as it heels or safely rounding up. Yup--it's a centerboard boat, you can't expect it to act like a keel boat, so I was fooling myself. But having sailed about a zillion boats, I can honestly say that's the only one that ever scared me. The reason I didn't let out the sheet is because I wasn't holding it. There's a strong sheeting effort in that big sail, and I was feathering along in the gusts... not the kind of boat you expect to have to sail like a Laser. So partly my bad. As I said, with enough attention being paid to all these things, the boat's not too bad. But if you're going to sail an unforgiving boat, seems like it might as well be sporty and fast and graceful."

I've decided on centerboard, so no Micros. Also I really, really don't believe in no-flare sharpies, having sailed a sharpie with flared sides, I think no flare in a flat bottomed boat is simply idiotic. Notice that the Atkins are with me on this one! Selway Fisher, I do like Goshawk which was referred to on the earlier thread, but its a more complicated build.

The Michalak design's merit is that it can be built as robust as you like, it is ballasted, its not too pronounced a pram, it has considerable rocker, and it does have some flare to the sides. If the AS19 and AS29 are decent designs, I think it should be too I would not have the bow open as he does (or as the Micro does). This is not really about walking out onto the beach without getting the feet wet, not in this climate.

Both designs are roomy, which is rather important, both are centerboards. Yes, ease and speed of build is rather important, the building accomodation is quite limited.

I really like the Pelican, and was on the point of just going for it, but came on Earling2's account, and that really gave me pause. It seems like the voice of a real experience by an experienced sailor, and yet both it and the other accounts are hard to reconcile. Well, impossible. Can it really be that people are regularly sailing these things, behaving like this, right out on the SF Bay, as its described (I don't know it personally). Maybe ballast would make some difference? The thing I find hardest to grasp is why the flare would not lead to progressive resistance to heeling. In my sharpie, it definitely does. You do get overpowered, and you do have to let out the sheet, but the flare gives you the margin of safety of time. I am absolutely certain that with slab sides it would be over before you could blink. With the flare, you have time as the rail starts to dip, to let out the sheet. So why is this effect not operating here?

In terms of ease of building, the three plank single chine sharpie type is obviously quickest since it can be built instant boat style, but going to 5 planks, that is, a narrow flat bottom and two side planks, that is probably doable, and seems to be what Paladin has done in his modification. In fact, maybe you could get a similar effect by building with the original, but adding a metal shoe. Michalak talks about adding lead ballast in one of his articles by having a double layer of ply on the bottom of a design, then bolting billets of lead through it. Manageable, and avoids casting and then handling huge heavy units.

At the moment, Earling2's comments cary a lot of weight for me. Of course, there is no comparable voice of experience on Jukebox2, it might be even worse!

[kenjamin]

Earling2 comments are consistent with Captain Short's. Captain Short said you need the live crew to keep her on her feet and as Earling2 admitted he had no ballast of any kind. He also admitted, if I remember correctly, that he should have reefed earlier. So much of seaworthiness is between the ears of the captain of a boat. I think that a Great Pelican could be handled safely in tough conditions but like others have said there are other designs that have self-righting abilities and with self-bailing cockpits that would be more appropriate for your average North Sea conditions.

More importantly than the design (IMHO) is the designer. If he or she is dead, they're not going to be able to provide much support for you during your build. If I were you I would go with a Dudley Dix design or one of John Welsford's. Both men have designs for modern boat building methods and have forums and seem to be particularly helpful with individual problems that you will probably have during your build.

http://www.dixdesign.com/inspir19.htm

http://www.jwboatdesigns.co.nz/plans/penguin/index.htm

[paladin]

Those comments and my own experience is what prompted me to do a redesign on the Pelican. My son is a lightweight compared to me, and his lady friend is about 5'4" and a lightweight also. I dropped the flat bottom to a V, dropped the centerboard thru the middle of it making it 9 inches lower than before, and added 300 pounds to the bottom of the boat and almost as much in the centerboard.....it's like having 3 deck apes on the rail.

[Woxbox]

If I were looking for what you are looking for, I too would go no further than the stretch micro. It will feel mighty secure and is said to sail in a very predictable manner. Although with Chuck's modifications to the big Pelican, I wouldn't be surprised if the that boat didn't have a similar feel.

[alcibiades]

The appeal of the Micro series is understandable, but they have the large defect for the intended use of the fixed keel. CB is essential. The other thing is those box sides. Probably many will differ, some fiercely, but it reminds one a bit of the philosopher Nora Ephron, who remarked that any dish that is good with capers is better without them. Any flat bottomed boat that is good, and has vertical sides, would be better were they flared. Oh well, its my considered opinion, or maybe this is where one man's considered opinion becomes another's prejudice. One could fairly easily flare the sides using the usual computer design packages of course. But the fixed keel remains an obstacle.

I found the earlier account of paladin's design changes, Chelydra, and they make a lot of sense, as well as apparently being similar in effect on weight distribution to the ones made by the people who sailed to Hawaii - they took out the CB trunk and added a weighted fixed keel. Don't recall the source for that.

paladin, when you added the flat, did you do it with chine logs (assume this), or did you use stitch and glue to join the panels? Have you posted the offsets anyplace, also? If it comes to doing this, I can redo it as described and get the panel shapes out of the machine, but it might be nice to know one was building something that had been done, and that had been seen to work, earlier!

[paladin]

I wouldn't really call them chine logs, but more like chine stringers...they were about 2" x 2" before nothching them in place and almost half was planed away, I felt it easier than drilling holes for stitch and glue. The inside of the chines were beveled and then I laid a couple pieces of glass tape over them on the inside. I haven't published the drawings or numbers as I'm currently finishing the drawings for a couple of forumites. If you want to do it yourself.....
I continued the lines forward another foot.....drew a line halfway between the centerboard forward log and rear log, down the center of the centerboard case to 9 inches below the existing hull.......I then drew the line as 8 inches wide at that point. Then, dropped the line down the center of the transom to 3 inches below the transom and 1 inch wide, and 2 inches below the center of the forward "transom" about 2 inches below the center and 1 inch wide, then drew a fair curve from the bow to the stern around the centerboard area.
Then I dropped the entire centerboard case. The frames were made, but I left the frames inside the boat for other reasons....I made the frames out of douglas fir stair tread stock, cut in 3/8ths inch thick pieces, every other piece switched end for end and epoxied back together, same for deck beams. I ran a pair of 2 x 4's the length of the centerboard case on either side to a point about 2 feet for and aft of the case, and then between them, ran a single 2 x 4 to the bow and stern to stiffen the bottom.
Double frames were made for the front of the cabin and below the deck, all were laminated and double thick. I wouldn't do that again.....I had extended the mast by one foot and instead of solid made a box spar, about 3/4 inch larger in both dimensions, 1 1/4 inch spruce walls , then moved it back from it's original; position by 4 inches. I drew (almost finished) a junk rig for it, but the new sails, slightly larger than the original sail well. I haven't seen the interior, nor has my son sent pictures, but the last note said that it's really quite comfortable inside with the new interior and the aft head...the lady friend liked the separate head. The best part is that anyone inspecting the boat would never find the head unless someone told them it was there. I'm working on some neat LED lights for the interior and for navigation.
Last but not least....I had estimated the amount of ballast, he thought it was high......I had included a couple of batteries and water tanks...if the water tanks and battery are installed, it should work out just fine. He used 320 pounds of lead in the centerboard/keel. I drew the centerboard with about 200 pounds of lead in it, and a show on the outside of the boat. The bottom has a "grounding shoe made of 2 x 4 and 2 x 6 solid wood epoxied and shaved to airfoil shape under the boat, about 4 inches below the bottom, then I added a flat lead plate of about 500 pounds, and that was covered with 3 xynole layers for abrasion protection.....the only thing that seems different to him is that the boat sails like a much heavier one, but just as fast as before, smoother, with less pounding, seems drier, and the "convertible top" works great, keeps out mosquitoes and other critters.

[kenjamin]

Hey paladin,

Thanks for the play by play of the conversion. I was with you until you added the 500 lbs. of lead. Is that now part of the grounding shoe? Is that shaped somehow to fit in with the shoe? And how much do we need to bribe your son to send us some pictures? I could help with that. Inquiring minds want to know. I hope I'm one of the formites you mentioned that would like the lines and other details of your more "shiply" Great Pelican. Hope you had a good Christmas. This Florida boy had his first ever white Christmas in Asheville, NC and did the Biltmore Estate tour which was great by the way. There was lots of the white stuff but I found it to be cold and wet. I belong in Florida I guess.

Have a great New Year!
kenjamin

[paladin]

Yup....they grounding shoe was added to protect the bottom when pulled up on a gravelly shore, and the lead added because of the increased displacement...if you carried a bunch of water, a couple of batteries, and a solar panel for lights and gadgets you could get away with less or even an iron or sheet steel shoe for weight......the lady friend only sails on few weekends...he needed the weight.
dunno about piks...I can't get a letter or phone call outta him for 6-8 months unless he wants money or something for his small business.

[dirtsailor]

If you're interested in the Pelican you should contact Lou Brochetti, I can send you his contact number via pm if you'd like. You can check out pictures of his boat at the following links:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirtsai...7604554323998/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirtsai...7604558437193/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dirtsai...7600631855132/


Dirtsailor

[paladin]

Most of us already have the Pelican/Great Pelican plans and were not satisfied with the performance/handling...that's why the redesign.

[dld]

Those comments and my own experience is what prompted me to do a redesign on the Pelican. Most of us already have the Pelican/Great Pelican plans and were not satisfied with the performance/handling...that's why the redesign.

I got my plans from Mr Short in Oct 1979 when it was for the twelve ft Pelican and had ask for more information about the chinese lug rig, He replied he was a tug boat capt and bar pilot and not a clerk. He wasn't to nice about it in his return letter, and it kinda put me off on building his boat.

paladin
when you finish your redesign I would like to get a copy if its affordable
I still would like to build one some day and always liked the look of the pelican

[paladin]

I'm probably one of the most affordable guys out there.....I'll post something here when the drawings are finished.....hang around.

[alcibiades]

Very nice pictures. Lovely work - mine will not look anything like this. And not just because of having a flush deck, I think its called optimistically workboat finish.

paladin, thanks. One can see why this lower bottom panel and then the substantial ballast in addition would make a big difference. In fact, its interesting, one of the things there seems to be a good consensus on is that the double chine design with flat bottom plank, a sort of very wide keel piece, and two panels per side rising from that, makes a good and seaworthy design. Chebacco is like this, and one or two Michalaks are also. Possibly the wide ply keel piece and then the CB through it are easier for a amateur to do like this than the classic V bottom and timber keel piece.

What is the resulting draft as you did it? A foot or more, one would imagine?

[peterbmetcalf]

I owned and sailed regularly on SF Bay out of Berkeley (east bay) during the winter and often during the summer for three years during my teens, a San Francisco Pelican (12') which had a fiberglass bottom up to the waterline. I was 130 pounds and very fit. I never reefed the sail. It had no reefpoints, and was low aspect too, so I was not tempted. Nonetheless, I preferred sailing in small craft warnings because my boat, being heavy owing to the fiberglass, sailed better. In small craft warnings, which were usual, as a solo sailor I sailed upwind out of Berkeley without the jib, sitting on the side deck, and felt very comfy with my foot hooked under the stern portion of the coaming. I took a lot of spray over the bow, and now and then had the lee deck immersed to the coaming (don't put an obstruction there like a jib block mounted on a large piece of wood that directs water into the boat). I hiked out if necessary; generally I was sitting as in a chair - slightly leaning back, swaying out depending on wind and wave. As I learned when sailing El Toros in sailing class at the Berkeley Aquatic Park a couple years earlier, always keep the mainsheet in hand ready to release from the cam jam cleat. Once when under the Oakland Bay Bridge, with two crew, a downward blast of 10-15 knots hit us while sailing as a sloop rig. We were not moving fast as the wind had been negligible, so the force was not converted to forward motion. If I had not had my hand on the sheet, we would have been over. The only time I felt OK about not having the mainsheet in hand was when sailing the Herreshoff take off "Bullsey" keel boat sloop rigged and solo in Owls Head Harbor, ME during this same period of my life.
When I sailed the SF Pelican with a single crew member of about 140 pounds or possibly my weight of 130, we always sailed as a sloop. Often in sailing the Pelican, I or we would be heading out of Berkeley when others were sailing in, or there was no one on the bay due to heavy wind (this was 1968-1971). In heavy conditions pointing, my friend and I would both be on the rail. For the forward crew member, it is comfortable to hike out with the forward foot hooked under the forward coaming. We used a cushion to make it more comfortable hanging the legs over the coaming. In the skipper's position, a cushion was inconvenient for tacking. But the deck was wide enough and at a good angle for sitting in such conditions. On a reach, he might not need to hike out. On a broad reach, I might not need to hike out, and in that case I sat inboard on the seats, which were about 4" above the sole. Once when reaching the CG helo flew over us just to make sure we were OK (no one else was on the bay due to the heavy wind). We couldn't have felt better.
Sailing the SF Pelican downwind without the jib created very strong weather helm. In small craft warnings winds with gusts to 10 knots, the boat when sailed as a cat rig headed up and there was nothing I could do about it, so I always made sure I had about 20 feet between me and any upwind boat when sailing downwind. With the jib it was less an issue, and if the jib were wing and wing there was no significant weather helm.
Regarding the bluff bow, it created a lot of spray in the sailing I did when pointing. On a reach, it was no worse than on a 23' Pearson Commander or Ariel (keel boat with pointed bow). Downwind, we surfed, however when the wave had passed to the bow, the bluff bow slowed us.
I own a Great Pelican now that is fiberglassed over wood for the entire hull, up to the gunnel. Not my preference for building unless the scantlings have been modified, as the boat is heavier not only at the bottom, where it adds stability. Inertia however is increased somewhat. I have only sailed her once, in the Berkeley Marina in small craft warnings wind. Pointing with a single reef, with jib rigged, and a single crew of about 140-150, and me at a diminished weight of 115, hiking out was for me at 5'08" impractical without a tiller extension (an extension was unnecessary on the 12' SF Pelican). My crew did not hike out. The water was often up to but never over the lee coaming. I felt we were overpowered for our weight, which is significantly less proportionally than on the SF Pelican (What is the displacement of the GP?). Perhaps next time I will see hiking out as an option. It did not come naturally this time. We moved fast on the flat water (without spray of course). I will file another report when I sail out of the marina into real bay weather when I get a mainsheet long enough to let the sail luff on a broad reach, a second row of reef points, and possibly an extension for the tiller.
I want to mention, the Pelicans, whether built by pros or amateurs, are not all built according to plan. The SF Pelican I sailed in my teens was built by a pro, but not built according to specs. Structurally, it was missing a member at the stern where there should be two. The Great Pelican my wife and I owned but never sailed decades ago, had a rudder that appeared, without measuring, to be well under what I thought was a necessary immersed depth. Short was very particular about messing with the design.
I also want to mention that the dory, on which the Pelican series is based, was designed for the business of fishing, for men who were not well respected by the ship's master or owner, and who perhaps did not respect their own lives as much as the profit of a full load of fish. I am told the dory is considerably more stable with a load of fish. When Capt. Short brought out the Great Pelican, I read in the local Pelican newsletter that it was fitted with water ballast against the centerboard trunk. I also want to remind people who may not know, the SF Pelican when fitted with foam only under the seats opposite to the side on which the boom and gaff are situated, is self righting, at least in the test that was performed on calm water decades ago.
Happy Sailing!
Peter Metcalf

[Jamesh]

Hi

I presume you have 12ft length in mind?
I would want something with a decent amount of stability.
A Welsford scamp seems ideal, stability, shelter and sailing ability. I would not want a boat without any of these in the north sea,
when I sailed there in a wayfairer it was hard work 3 up in a force 4-5. Its cold especially in a easterly wind.
Do you have a mooring or are you trailer saying?
How about pilgrim or even better a swaggie, I think John had the north sea in mind when he designed swaggie. Ideal for taking over to holland, if it gets rough just put in a reef and head below with the kettle on!
Funny how a Nz designer designs so well for uk!
Other designs that come to mind are Selway fishers pioneer but its a bigger boat.
James.

[peterbmetcalf]

I received today from Mrs. Short, who sells the original plans, building instructions, etc. at pelicansailboat@msn.com, some Great Pelican drawings and study plans. On one is Capt. Short's recommendation that singlehanders place ballast such as water bags under the seats, or as an alternative, against the cb trunk, as well as a simple plan for ballasting the wood centerboard. It really pays to confirm that a boat is built to specs when evaluating one's own boat performance or that of someone else, as there are so many non-production companies and individuals building a small boat designs. My current boat, a Great Pelican, has a rudder that in the immersed portion is shorter by 10" and narrower by 4," well worth correcting. The rudder as Capt. Short designed it would shift the center of lateral resistance aft, thus reducing weather helm, whilst providing more depth and steerage on all points, most critically with the boat heeled. Incidentally, he shows foam blocks under the starboard seat with the gaff/boom hoisted on the port side, for self righting.

[peterbmetcalf]

wrong location...