I have now had several letters on the subject of updating the Roamer design. The matter was also discussed at the AGM. The consensus was that the existing design fulfils its purpose so well that it would be a mistake to change its shape where such amendment could prejudice its seaworthiness.

The main purpose of any change should be to make it easier to build. Accordingly I have had a long consultation with Paul Fisher, the naval architect of Selway Fisher Designs who are specialists in design for easy construction. For a moderate fee he has generated the shape of the hull panels by computer and has produced a drawing for the hull shape to be built by the stitch and tape method together with modified instructions. These are available from him for £15.00. To build Roamer you will still need the full plans and instructions from the DCA which are available at the lowest possible price and include an enormous amount of detail. You will have to buy these first. You can then build it the original way or purchase the extra directions from Selway Fisher to allow the quicker method.

The stitch and tape method will save weight but will not make the Roamer a light boat. After all, the ballast weight and centreboard total some 160 lbs.

I personally have never found the weight of the boat any handicap to launching - it is only 600 lbs. when built by the traditional method, this would be considered nothing among the beach launched fishing boats of the last century - but a disadvantage I have found with my Roamer and which is confirmed by other owners, is the mast for the bermudan rig. It is only some 17’ 6” long, but is stepped on the foredeck where one has to stand to erect it. I step it every time I sail my boat but it gets harder as I get older. It is not possible to step it inside the hull as it would impede the hatch to the forepeak, which must be on the centreline.

The other disadvantage of its length is that it won't go into the average garage. If you keep the boat in one the mast has to go somewhere else; in my case half a mile away. Eric, in his description of the design development did state that the rig was experimental. Accordingly I am drawing up a new sail plan which can also be considered experimental, for a sliding gunter rig - the mast to be about 15’ or shorter, solid fir and to be stepped in a tabernacle. The only disadvantage will be the necessity for a slightly smaller genoa. It is possible that the lower windage when reefed will allow a reduction of ballast. Certainly it will be easier to build than the hollow model with twin shrouds as drawn, although you can always buy a metal mast as I have done.

There was also much interest in a new single-handed design. The reason given by most people for wanting this is the expectation of lighter weight for easier handling ashore. This was discussed with Paul Fisher and he thought such an idea would probably require a shorter boat which if it followed the Roamer concept would look unbearably dumpy. He is giving it further consideration, but my own thoughts on the matter is that the great survival characteristics of a Roamer are not required by everyone as it seems that there is less interest in attempting long coastal passages, let alone cross channel trips, compared with thirty years ago.

It should be possible with only a moderate amount of ballast, combined with buoyancy in the ends of a boat with a bold sheer, to ensure easy righting or even slow self-righting after a capsize, in a lighter boat. This combined with a stable forgiving hull section could be the answer. If the centreboard case can be sealed or carried high enough to be above the waterline when swamped, there should be no difficulty in baling out. I consider that the main reason for the distressing tendency of modem unballasted boats to turn turtle is due to their flat sheer combined with buoyancy arranged too low in the boat, particularly at the ends. The flat deck-line is drawn of course to reduce windage in order to chase that 'holy grail' - windward ability.

Still, regardless of my opinion, I should be grateful for any comments from members as to what features they see as desirable in a possible single-hander; they can then be incorporated where possible.