Personally, I like the idea of making the sort of changes being discussed.
Mast (un)stepping: I miss it -- even though MicroTom and I were mighty frustrated at CP1 in '11 trying to unstep, re-step, stow, and row with our 26', 6-stay Lightning mast. 1.5 hours for the rigging part, while watching the entire world go by.... But the masochist in me says we should go back through the old RR bridge and sign into a virtual CP near the old CP1, or pass under the Boca Grande RR bridge to a similar virtual CP. This would also give folks the option of doing this filter BEFORE checking in at Cape Haze if they so choose, and would add more route decisions to the EC, including use of Gasparilla Pass if they get to Stump and feel it unsafe.
Or a start-unstepped-and-rig-off-the-beach approach. Launch, anchor (what, no suitable anchor??), and then get underway. If the conditions are too rough to successfully rig, then that becomes a de-facto "hold" for that craft.
Self-righting (no human onboard or assisting) is simply not possible for virtually all of the Class IV/V craft (nor the rest of the EC fleet). But even if a craft were able to self-right in calm water, it could not be counted on to do so in the conditions likely to cause such a "self-righting" (high-stability) vessel to capsize.
So the real question is, can the crew self-rescue? And that really needs to be practiced, or at least tested, in realistically bad conditions. But for most Challengers and most small craft, that won't happen, because virtually no sane person would intentionally go out -- much less 5 miles out -- in Beaufort 6/7 and then capsize their expedition-trimmed craft in order to test/practice unaided self-recovery. Passing the test in calm water might be better than nothing but might also build overconfidence unless good thought was given to how it could be successfully executed when the chips are really down.
It was a dope-slapper for me that anti-inversion provisions like headboard flotation may not work when I'm reefed -- which is ironically when we're quite likely to hit the water. I've told myself that my lug rig's yard will provide significant buoyancy, and I have been figuring how to enhance it with foam in a sleeved head. But I had not considered the effect of a reef -- or two. By the way, I do think masthead flotation could be fitted to a lug rig's mast tip if it's high enough above the halyard sheeve/block
Many boats entered in the EC require 2 crew for successful self-recovery. That water ballet should be practiced together (not with someone else). And what if one crewmember is incapacitated or otherwise unavailable during a capsize -- say, carried away by wind/waves/current?
Some boats/crews like the solo Finn dinghy capsize frequently and skippers are very used to getting wet and then getting going again (this look familiar, NixWorrium? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYDtn1-g6i4 
). Finns are far from self-righting, but easily self-rescued by one person. Their metal C/B is definitely part of that formula. Personally, I wouldn't want to sail a Finn for 300 miles, but Nix did -- successfully.
Many incidents requiring outside assistance result from failure of gear such as rig or rudder. Is there a (tested) plan for jury-rigging a sail or rudder, assuming the vessel is right-side-up?
Of course, each boat and crew definitely need to be prepared for "the worst". This year's EC, and virtually every one of the half-dozen-plus ECs and NCCs or cancelled ones that I've entered, have had some seriously gnarly conditions. Each boat/crew has different characteristics and approaches to achieving suitable seaworthiness, and different success doing it.
I've had good opportunity to explore this and compare boats, having entered three rather different boats in those events: my '83 Sea Pearl (21'), my modified '69 Lightning (19'), and my '83? Banshee skiff (13'). All three were "solo expeditionized" with at least one lugs'l. The key criterion for my entering a 300 mile Challenge solo is comfort: physical (beanbag!), and mental comfort with the boat's expedition-worthiness. Likelihood of capsize, and, more importantly, likelihood of self-recovery.
I've capsized all three of these boats. The Lightning and Banshee were in very challenging conditions and the SP capsizes (3 in 32 years) were not in particularly challenging conditions. Their comparison is interesting.
Like the heavier Finn, my Banshee is easy to self-rescue. Of course, she's wet, has inadequate load capacity for the longer Challenges, and is anything but self-righting.
My sole Lightning capsize (that I've even seen much less experienced) was crew-error in rough conditions off East Cape, in '15.. While not solo, I was easily and quickly able to repeatedly re-right the boat alone by climbing out on her centerboard (crew-mate was still in the water). Unfortunately, we were unable to fully recover and carry on due to: the board's eventual retraction (crew-error), swamping (crew-error), loss of potential dewatering equipment (crew-error), rig damage from hitting the bottom (though jury-rig was a viable option), and my crew-mate suffering incipient hypothermia (now many hours later on a swamped boat) due to being inadequately dressed (no dry-suit).
But Sawhorse's sage comment rang true -- that someday her 130# steel c/b would save my bacon. Without it, we'd still have been upside-down. That c/b is better than a keel because it can be retracted in the skinny stuff and can also withstand hitting submerged motorblocks. A simple self-rescue and shoal-water alert system. I was hoping to do the EC in her this year, solo for the first time. I would have felt quite comfortable doing so, risk-wise, and far more comfy than NixWorrium!
I've had my Sea Pearl since '85, and she's easily the most comfortable overnighter of the three (and the best-looking). But she's also the one that I'd be most uncomfortable entering in an EC from a self-rescue perspective. After 3 pretty random solo capsizes (none in Challenges) in relatively protected waters and sorta-fresh conditions, I know that I could not have self-rescued. Even with motorboat assistance, it was a hella struggle to get the totally swamped boat to a beach, to dewater. And that's a LOT of water..
My early-vintage SP has no water-ballast tanks, but I'm not sure they are a help: full w/b in a SP makes her somewhat harder to capsize, and presumably easier to re-right, but it does not help the swamped vessel from becoming too awash to bail out in anything but millpond conditions. OTOH, empty w/b tanks would help with flotation -- but they do nothing to prevent capsize, and they will likely hinder re-righting due to the empty tanks' buoyancy being too low in the boat (keeping it inverted). And then there's the problem of her (inadequately sized) articulated leeboards, which also exacerbate the self-rescue challenge. In my opinion, Roamer's roller-flotation scheme plus something like Sawhorse's/Jarhead's masthead float(s) are must-have for the EC -- at least if I were to do it in my SP. Unfortunately, while I generally have yellow rollers under my side decks, I didn't have them in any of my capsizes. I should also add that my capsizes were all solo. Two-up might yield a more favorable outcome.
I'm sorry to say that to make the SP's almost-40-year-old "beach-cruiser" design suitably expedition-worthy, she needs either 1) safety enhancements (some developed since then), or 2) the above and other retrofits. Yes, Jarhead has an incredible record in WaterTribe events sailing his pretty stock SP, and appears to give lie to my concerns, but IMHO he's easily the most experienced and disciplined ("expert") SP'er out there today.
Thoughtful modifications -- of boat designs, safety requirements, and the EC itself -- are all good.
DKHT
