The fate of "Suhaili"

Suhaili is a genuinely historic vessel, because she made the first ever solo, non-stop voyage around the world.
This means she is unique.
She WILL be looked after, one way or another, never fear.
Obviously an exception should be made for the 10m rule, but if jobsworths deny this fact, other means will be found.

Not quite non-stop, if I recall the book - didn't he anchor in Australia or New Zealand (but didn't contact the shore)?
 
Not quite non-stop, if I recall the book - didn't he anchor in Australia or New Zealand (but didn't contact the shore)?

Greetings,
hopefully some expert can clarify this important point, then we can determine if Suhaili's celebrity status is justified ;) ;) ;)

Edited to add: I am not entirely impartial on this topic, as I also sail a William Atkin double-ender..
 
Last edited:
Greetings,
hopefully some expert can clarify this important point, then we can determine if Suhaili's celebrity status is justified ;) ;) ;)

Edited to add: I am not entirely impartial on this topic, as I also sail a William Atkin double-ender..

Page 118 of "A world of my own". He grounded in the entrance to Otago harbour, and laid an anchor. He did not go ashore or accept assistance from other vessels, so his record stands. But he was in touch with the shore and local vessels.
 
Suhaili and to a slightly lesser extent Lively Lady and Gypsy Moth IV would be in something like the Smithsonian in the US, if our museums aren't going nuts to save these boats there's something very wrong and maybe a change in leadership / focus is required.

Maybe the RYA could have a say too.
 
Last edited:
Page 118 of "A world of my own". He grounded in the entrance to Otago harbour, and laid an anchor. He did not go ashore or accept assistance from other vessels, so his record stands. But he was in touch with the shore and local vessels.

Page 119 in mine !!!
Jolly good read though. With all the posts on this forum about what to do about falling overboard I find it funny that at one point he dived overboard & swam alongside whilst the boat sailed along. He commented on how his boat looked sailing along on its own.
Not so sure that I would do that
 
Suhaili and to a slightly lesser extent Lively Lady and Gypsy Moth IV would be in something like the Smithsonian in the US, if our museums aren't going nuts to save these boats there's something very wrong and maybe a change in leadership / focus is required.

Maybe the RYA could have a say too.

We have a long and ignoble tradition of failing to keep items of historical interest, especially maritime ones. Queen Mary was saved by the Yanks, QE2 is maybe going to be saved by the Arabs, HMS Hermes future hangs in the balance and just might be saved by the Indians while we failed to make anything of plans to keep HMS Plymouth/Edinborough/Bronington and the classic bit of historical vandalism HMS Warspite. The Yanks do rather better so if you want to see a real battleship a visit across the pond is required.
 
Maybe I am just not sentimental about these things, but personally I think any boat should be sailed or scrapped (or laid up with the intention of being sailed in the future). Should an exception be made for vessels of historic interest? Perhaps, but I don't think that really applies for Suhaili.

What exactly does "historic" mean? Suhaili was built in 1963, the same year the first Westerly yachts appeared - are they also "historic vessels" now? Additionally, as I understand it, Suhaili has been extensively rebuilt since she was removed from the National Maritime Museum over 15 years ago, so it's not exactly the same boat.
 
What exactly does "historic" mean? Suhaili was built in 1963, the same year the first Westerly yachts appeared - are they also "historic vessels" now? Additionally, as I understand it, Suhaili has been extensively rebuilt since she was removed from the National Maritime Museum over 15 years ago, so it's not exactly the same boat.

I guess you do not still have your grandfather's axe - or the ship of Theseus, for that matter. :)
 
HMS Victory has had a lot of bits replaced, she's still a global treasure Britain can and should be very proud of; the same goes to the accomplishments of Sir Robin Knox Johnston, Sir Alec Rose ( the only person I've ever asked for an autograph, as a boy ) and Sir Francis Chichester - all knighthoods given when it meant a great deal, not being a popular singer etc.

As for a museum point of view, yes the first Westerly ought to be there too, but as a notch on history's bedpost not the bed itself which these three boats represent. :)
 
If you want to solve the problem just put it about that it was built in India using illegal logged teak, built by underpaid child labour & the leftish luvvies will have it scrapped & written out of history in a flash. Poor old Sir Robin will be vilified on social media & hounded for such an unfounded sin & for profiteering from a media stunt
Job done
 
Last edited:
What exactly does "historic" mean? Suhaili was built in 1963, the same year the first Westerly yachts appeared - are they also "historic vessels" now? Additionally, as I understand it, Suhaili has been extensively rebuilt since she was removed from the National Maritime Museum over 15 years ago, so it's not exactly the same boat.

Greetings, if R K-J had got around the world, solo non-stop, on a Westerly, then that particular tupperware floating caravan would be the historic vessel. ( A far-fetched scenario, as a psychiatrist declared him completely sane shortly before departure..)
If , as you say, the Westerly was available, he must have rejected the design ;)
 
Last edited:
Yes, but Victory's centuries old, not to mention being a stunningly impressive visual sight.

So put a CGI display or at least a film description next to the three boats mentioned here.

You could have a simulator too which spins people until they don't know where they are in the dark, pitches ultra-violently, soaks people in cold water and blows severe gale force winds as they have to tie a reef in, if they could be starved for a week first that would be better. :encouragement:
 
What exactly does "historic" mean? Suhaili was built in 1963, the same year the first Westerly yachts appeared - are they also "historic vessels" now? Additionally, as I understand it, Suhaili has been extensively rebuilt since she was removed from the National Maritime Museum over 15 years ago, so it's not exactly the same boat.
To the best of my knowledge, she was just refastened, the teak still being sound.
 
Top