Ok This is the boat

Starfish,

Great Idea! I would like to do something similar but my wife is not keen on the idea of living on a boat for several years. I have built a number of smaller boats and have to be content with my day sailors for now anyway. I thought I wood add my ideas as well.


to your questions above,

1. Do not add fiberglass as already pointed out, it adds weight, cost, will hasten the rot of the wood (traps moisture), and not add strength. wood in salt water is already pretty rot proof, you can add wood treatment before you paint or finish it that would add to its life, but do not use fiberglass over wood (build a foam and fiberglass boat if that is what you want).

2. white oak is a traditional wood, and it has fair rot resistance, though it is costly and heavy. Doug fir is a good alternative, also rot resistant, it cost less, is actually stronger and lighter than white oak, and easier to work (but not as pretty in bright finish). White pine is also good as suggested by PAR. You might ask the plans supplier what other current builders are using. Also go hang out at a wood boat building/repair yard and ask what they like to use for lumber. The cost of the same wood will vary a lot depending on how far they have to ship it, so a good locally available wood will work fine and save money. Boats have been built from anything and everything, even bamboo! One way to save a lot of money on lumber is to buy raw logs (right from a local property owner) and mill and dry them yourself with a portable mill. The cost savings is very large, but it does add to the time it takes to build, but you can control the quality.

3. If you mill them yourself and find your own logs, it could be next to nothing in cost. I built a 14 foot all wood sloop and spent about $20 in lumber, I salvaged it all from old buildings being torn down for free and remilled it myself. If you look around for old collapsed barns or old wood buildings falling over, you might get the wood free just for hauling off the site (you do not know unless you ask, that is how I find my lumber). Or you could spend up to $30,000 in lumber cost if you buy the best retail lumber you can find.

4. You do not need a kiln, just a drying shed. Weather tight and big enough to stack and store your rough planks. You could add large south facing skylights to add some solar heat, or simply insulate the building and put a number of 100 watt bulbs in it.


Several other suggestions for your plan: see if you can find one of these boats and go for a ride (the people that sell the plans might be able to pass your name on to builders who have recently completed them). Even if you have to pay them to take you out on it, see what it is like to sail in one BEFORE you build it.

And by the time you are done building yours you will be quite skilled in wood working, starting with the tender is a good idea. Then do some unimportant parts, like the cabinets, trim and cabin, then move on to the larger structural parts after you feel confident butchering wood.

I would also consider putting a more modern sailing rig on it, it will cost less, sail better and be easier to handle than that obsolete sail plan on the original design. Talk to a good sail loft about it, they can design you a more modern sail plan that will still look great on the boat and be much simpler to use and maintain.

good luck.

 

Thanks everyone for posting, i think i'm going too take
a few courses in late AUG. lofting and a 2 week class.
Not 100% sure yet on that. Depends if i can get a grasp
on it with books/video. Also, good idea on the salvaged wood idea.
I might look around for a wood barn coming down (oak).
I prob. will keep the sail plan. I'm not going too change anything,
and if the sail plan is hard too use, then ill get better with it. HEHE
But it sure is scary looking!

 

As currently drawn, that sail plan will require more then one person to operate it. With a pole mast and some rigging alterations, none of which would change the look (other then the pole mast) or configuration.

You must remember it was drawn before most modern terminals and rigging practices were invented. You should strongly consider having the sail plan updated to incorporate modern conveniences.

Why? Man handling a rig like that will require a large crew. The square course alone will need 4 to man it, plus crew to handle the fore and aft sheets and helm. A very skilled crew may be able to man the course with just 2, but they'd need to be big, young and healthy.

The color picture of a Fore & Aft (built 1998) in front of the Golden gate shows a crew of four, no square course installed, the addition of winches and roller furling. In spite of this, they have a lousy set on 3 of the 5 sails hoisted, though they retained the fiddled topmast.

 

I just wanted too again thank' everyone for your input, and ideas.
After reading some more, and doing some deep thinking, i have decided
not too build my own boat now. I will one day, but not this year. I am about 95% sure my next boat will be a used good flicka. For you that dont know, its a 20' Pacific Seacraft pocket cruiser. Im excited too start my search for this boat, and will be asking more questions about equipment upgrades in the future in another area of boatdesign.net. Good luck all. Great site, that im sure will help me along the way in purchase/upgrading in the near future.

 

I think you have made a very wise decision.

Let us know if we can be of any help.

K9

 

Starfish, Flicka is a great little sea boat. The general configuration and size would make a much more reasonable first build, being literally a fraction of the effort and materials necessary then "Fore & Aft". There are several designs within the Flicka like envelope, all would make a nice entry into the home built arena. Flicka retains her value quite well and doesn't stay on the market very long, which is a good indication of their worth among sailors and the builder.

 

All very true, the flickas (in good shape) fly off the market.
Before i look into a used one, i would be interested in any home build plans
on this boat. I know the designer (Bruce Bingham) sold plans before PSC company
took over. If anyone has these plans, or can find them for a wood built boat (cold molded)Flicka,
i would go that route. It would cost more then the used price of a good
flicka 20-30k, but the added knowlage that my boat
Is new/built too last, would be worth the extra 10-20k.

PSC flicka
Nor'star

 

Lovely choice for a boat. Few other boats could compete for looks, and fewer for comfort.
Remember: You will begin by building the most important part of the boat at a time when you know the least, and when you've arrived at building the least important parts, you'll already be a master craftsman and nearly done.
That's why the first part should be done the most slowly and carefully, with lots of advice and patience.

Alan

 

Trying to find plans (possible copyright issues) a bare hull (I think some where sold this was) or one that is near derelict for rebuilding will be a very difficult task.

I keep tracks on about 100 boats of "interest" to me. About once a year I'll touch base with the contacts and see what's up with the old gals. These boats may have historical value, noted racing records, famous previous owners, etc., I have in the past been able to save an old lady from the land fill or bail out a desperate owner. This has taken many years and countless visits to hundreds of marinas, boat shops and back yards.

My point is, I wouldn't wan to have to chase down the 15 or so available Flicka hulls (partly built, bare hull, restoration subject, etc.) just because of the "leg" work necessary and I have a fair amount of experience at it. Starfish, given your experience level, you'd be at a distinct disadvantage to find any of the very limited number available (nothing personal).

You may want to look into buy a built version of . . .



Try www.glen-l.com and look up Amigo. You may want to build one and it has similar qualities of a Flicka.

 

I meant Fore 'n' Aft, that is. The Flicka is a lot of boat for her length, but she's very slow. I know they are popular, but I often wonder why the same money couldn't have bought a longer boat. One could say, "I wanted the biggest 22 footer I could afford", or say, "I wanted the longest (and hence fastest) boat I could afford."
The displacement would be similar, but one boat is graceful and fast, the other slow. Both are seaworthy.
I would take a Seabird yawl over a Flicka or an Amigo, for example. Not a lot of headroom, but what a pretty boat.
And at Flicka's length, you'd see me in a Blue Moon or an Itchin Ferry cutter.
Those can be had reasonably too. On the bigger end of the twenties, check out a Cape George cutter. Another Atkin series.

Alan

 

To me Flicka only real attribute is standing headroom in a 20' boat, which doesn't make me want one, but it's an interesting solution to a common problem in small craft. From a designers point of view, he used several tricks to make the coach roof look reasonably low and to me this is meaningful, though I'm not sure particularly practical in a craft of this size. This, likely marketing team mandated element of the design, probably tripled the boat's displacement and doubled its draft, just to hit it. The resulting hole it has to drag along with it is cavernous and slows her down a lot. On the other side of the coin, the D/L shot way up, making her a sort of comfortable little cruiser in a blow.

God, I've sailed a Seabird Alan, I'd never own one of those either. I'm experienced enough to want the longest boat I can afford. Fat boats suck, but you have elbow room. Additional length provide storages and sailing lines, but not with the penalties that additional beam or draft brings to the table. I'd personally live better with a lean shallow boat then a deep fat one and I could wade ashore in knee deep water too. It's a hell of a thing to have to drag a dinghy along because your 22' pocket cruiser requires draft to get standing headroom.

I think it boils down to experience. You either have it, or want a floating condo with shoal draft and full standing headroom on a 22' LWL, microwave optional, if you can find a spot for the gen set.

 

I haven't been aboard a Seabird, Paul, so I'm speaking of curb appeal and reputation. I like headroom like anyone else, up to the point of messing up a great profile, which I couldn't abide even if it didn't create windage as well.
I think about 24 ft of waterline is probably the point when a boat ends up with "natural" looking headroom, unless like some heavy cutters with plumb ends, most of the boat is under water. The older designers (Atkins, Strange, Geary, etc.) were masters of proportion, creating the impression that only at the end of the design process did they discover whether there "happened" to be headroom.
Nowadays I think the reverse is true. We live in an age when aesthetics are not much of a driving force.
I'm not disparaging the Flicka---- she's a capable boat, built like a Sherman tank and she's probably one of the most complete cruisers for her length. It's just that 50k is a lot of money for a used 22 ft boat (and 100k a lot for a new one). My last boat was a Carter 33, which I paid 8k for, and which was in very good condition. Not much heavier than a laden Flicka (400 ft of working sail!), but able to cruise (and had) across oceans in regal comfort. Other than ten feet of extra docking fees, which boat would most people prefer?

A.