West wight Potter yes no maybe so??

[Ross]

An excellant story and positive proof that a man and

his boat can be over whelmed if conditions are bad enough. The ultimate storm is always going to be a relative term. A nuclear power aircraft carrier can survive storms that will overwhelm all other ships.

 

[jcherubini]

Small-boat seaworthiness

It may be true a quick daylight jaunt from Fort Lauderdale to Bimini is not QUITE the same thing as 'going offshore'. But, anything can happen.There are certain boats I would NOT under ANY circumstances venture offshore with. And it's not a long list. I have often said that ANY boat can be made seaworthy, that it all comes down to provisioning and selection of upgrades and crew readiness. But that's a conditioned statement. I don't think anyone would hold that statement absolute with, perhaps, a Hunter 17, or a Sunfish, or a plastic canoe.I would not take a West Wight Potter centerboarder to sea. The boat is too short and too shallow to make any riding-out of sea waves safe or comfortable or, maybe, even doable. In spite of its name it was not intended to be an oceangoing craft. That should be obvious by looking at it. Look at the types of boats people have taken offshore and count the number of 13"-deep non-ballasted centerboarders among them. Then call those people and ask about their regrets.There are other boats I would add to this list and for similar reasons.My HUGE caveat would be against ANY boat with primarily or solely water ballast, such as the MacGregor 26 and its relations. Water ballast may be suitable for non-displacement applications, such as multihulls, but even MacGregor's lofty claims that his boat 'planes' will not apply at sea, where windspeed can be 3 times the boat length and waves maybe 6 times. At times like those I want positive, not neutral, stability, and plenty of it. No centerboard-only trailerable boat, however affordable or otherwise attractive, should attempt an independent sea crossing by anyone not prepared to be in true survival mode 24/7.MacGregor's boats are legendary for having corners cut in the interests of keeping the price low. Improving hull thickness, the hull-deck seam, and rigging and equipment attachments to make the boat seaworthy could (and probably should) make the boat cost-ineffective and make you find another shoal-draft boat that is safer and better built.I acknowledge (from being the one to first mention it here some years ago) that MacGregor's fame in the boat business was largely built on his 'dare' in the early 70s for anyone to singlehand a trailerable sailboat under 25 feet from San Diego to Hawaii. The $25,000 cash prize he put up was won by a guy with a Venture 21.Sure, plenty of people will say, 'A guy with a boat just like mine did it.'To which I will ask, with respect, 'Are YOU that guy?' Because that's the question really.

 

[jcherubini]

Small-boat seaworthiness

It may be true a quick daylight jaunt from Fort Lauderdale to Bimini is not QUITE the same thing as 'going offshore'. But, anything can happen.There are certain boats I would NOT under ANY circumstances venture offshore with. And it's not a long list. I have often said that ANY boat can be made seaworthy, that it all comes down to provisioning and selection of upgrades and crew readiness. But that's a conditioned statement. I don't think anyone would hold that statement absolute with, perhaps, a Hunter 17, or a Sunfish, or a plastic canoe.I would not take a West Wight Potter centerboarder to sea. The boat is too short and too shallow to make any riding-out of sea waves safe or comfortable or, maybe, even doable. In spite of its name it was not intended to be an oceangoing craft. That should be obvious by looking at it. Look at the types of boats people have taken offshore and count the number of 13"-deep non-ballasted centerboarders among them. Then call those people and ask about their regrets.There are other boats I would add to this list and for similar reasons.My HUGE caveat would be against ANY boat with primarily or solely water ballast, such as the MacGregor 26 and its relations. Water ballast may be suitable for non-displacement applications, such as multihulls, but even MacGregor's lofty claims that his boat 'planes' will not apply at sea, where windspeed can be 3 times the boat length and waves maybe 6 times. At times like those I want positive, not neutral, stability, and plenty of it. No centerboard-only trailerable boat, however affordable or otherwise attractive, should attempt an independent sea crossing by anyone not prepared to be in true survival mode 24/7.MacGregor's boats are legendary for having corners cut in the interests of keeping the price low. Improving hull thickness, the hull-deck seam, and rigging and equipment attachments to make the boat seaworthy could (and probably should) make the boat cost-ineffective and make you find another shoal-draft boat that is safer and better built.I acknowledge (from being the one to first mention it here some years ago) that MacGregor's fame in the boat business was largely built on his 'dare' in the early 70s for anyone to singlehand a trailerable sailboat under 25 feet from San Diego to Hawaii. The $25,000 cash prize he put up was won by a guy with a Venture 21.Sure, plenty of people will say, 'A guy with a boat just like mine did it.'To which I will ask, with respect, 'Are YOU that guy?' Because that's the question really.

 

[Ross]

In the story that was referrenced in an earlier

post the writer said the the West Wight Potter didn't have as much inboard freeboard as out board freeboard. I took that to mean that at some point the boat could flood through the centerboard trunk even if the outside of the boat was apparently doing well. I should think that for a boat to be considered safe to take into harms way it should have a quickly draining small cockpit, be self righting and have the means to close the cabin water tight. When I first saw any write ups about the West Wight Potter it was discribed as a little boat for pottering about in. It was never envisioned as a voyaging boat. Almost every night on the evening news we get weather pictures from Ocean City beaches. Sometimes the sea looks like a mill pond and at other times it is pretty rough. There are some wonderful places behind the barrier islands where a little boat like this would be lovely. There are times on the Chesapeake Bay that while managable in Bietzpadlin I am very thankful that it is fairly big and solid.

 

[Ross]

In the story that was referrenced in an earlier

post the writer said the the West Wight Potter didn't have as much inboard freeboard as out board freeboard. I took that to mean that at some point the boat could flood through the centerboard trunk even if the outside of the boat was apparently doing well. I should think that for a boat to be considered safe to take into harms way it should have a quickly draining small cockpit, be self righting and have the means to close the cabin water tight. When I first saw any write ups about the West Wight Potter it was discribed as a little boat for pottering about in. It was never envisioned as a voyaging boat. Almost every night on the evening news we get weather pictures from Ocean City beaches. Sometimes the sea looks like a mill pond and at other times it is pretty rough. There are some wonderful places behind the barrier islands where a little boat like this would be lovely. There are times on the Chesapeake Bay that while managable in Bietzpadlin I am very thankful that it is fairly big and solid.

 

[Joe11688]

A great read!

That was a great read! I thoroughly enjoyed reading that story. Potters are OK in protected areas, but not for crossing oceans or the Great Lakes. I would still vote for the Flicka 20 as being a capable boat with an experienced sailor, of which I would never qualify for this task. I'm quite content just sailing in Mount Hope and Narragansett Bays, thank you.Joe

 

[Joe11688]

A great read!

That was a great read! I thoroughly enjoyed reading that story. Potters are OK in protected areas, but not for crossing oceans or the Great Lakes. I would still vote for the Flicka 20 as being a capable boat with an experienced sailor, of which I would never qualify for this task. I'm quite content just sailing in Mount Hope and Narragansett Bays, thank you.Joe

 

[Chuck Pierce]

Bill Teplow's Hawaii Trip

Bill Teplow's Potter 19 "Chubby" had a standard 370 lb daggerboard when he sailed it to Hawaii. The new keel was installed after the marina dropped the boat while removing it from the container he shipped it back from Hawaii in (he didn't want to sail upwind for 40 or 50 days). He had installed 2 - 1 1/2" cockpit drains and extra flotation, but other than that the boat was unmodified, and he stated in the article that he wrote on the voyage for Small Craft Advisor that the boat was never really tested during the trip and that it was really very routine. Bill normally sails in San Francisco Bay and said that conditions on the Hawaii trip never got as bad as most Bay afternoons, and that the worst conditions of the trip were encountered leaving San Francisco. So, experienced captain and the right mods plus checking the pilot charts and weather for an acceptable window=a dull 24 day trip. Potter 19's have been sailed to Bermuda, the Sea of Cortez, Key West, the Inside Passage to British Columbia and many other places that involved short bluewater passages. I would not suggest to anyone with limited experience that they should buy a P-19 and immediately head off to Bimini, neither would I say that they should do it in a Flicka (or any other boat regardless of size). Experience matters.

 

[Chuck Pierce]

Bill Teplow's Hawaii Trip

Bill Teplow's Potter 19 "Chubby" had a standard 370 lb daggerboard when he sailed it to Hawaii. The new keel was installed after the marina dropped the boat while removing it from the container he shipped it back from Hawaii in (he didn't want to sail upwind for 40 or 50 days). He had installed 2 - 1 1/2" cockpit drains and extra flotation, but other than that the boat was unmodified, and he stated in the article that he wrote on the voyage for Small Craft Advisor that the boat was never really tested during the trip and that it was really very routine. Bill normally sails in San Francisco Bay and said that conditions on the Hawaii trip never got as bad as most Bay afternoons, and that the worst conditions of the trip were encountered leaving San Francisco. So, experienced captain and the right mods plus checking the pilot charts and weather for an acceptable window=a dull 24 day trip. Potter 19's have been sailed to Bermuda, the Sea of Cortez, Key West, the Inside Passage to British Columbia and many other places that involved short bluewater passages. I would not suggest to anyone with limited experience that they should buy a P-19 and immediately head off to Bimini, neither would I say that they should do it in a Flicka (or any other boat regardless of size). Experience matters.

 

[Jack h23.5]

Shoal draft sailing..

In order to do shoal draft sailing (less then 2 feet of water) you need a boat that has fixed ballast internally and a usable shallow draft rudder. The Potter 19 has a retractable keel which must be down to sail, so your shoal draft would have to be by motor. I would look at a keel centerboard boat, with a shallow winged rudder for steerage in the flats. If you are taking a class c stability boat (coastal and lake) into blue water, then most any class c boat will be just as risky. Find one you like that meets your needs. A Potter 19 is beachable, but not really a shoal draft sailor.