Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby el_loco_avs » Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:26 am UTC

TheKrikkitWars wrote:
Kyrn wrote:
electriczap4 wrote:Plain and simple, the second she gets 7 miles out to sea she can tell every country there is to go forth and have sexual intercourse with themselves. International waters do have an advantage =]. Plus it's not like she will have no contact, if something goes wrong, she WILL be able to contact people.

Depends on what sort of "wrong" happens, of course. People have practically disappeared in sailing incidents.

Following the invention of the PLB there's no excuse for going missing at sea.

Well. She could get run over by another boat.


In other news: the world "zeilmeisje"(sail girl) apparantly finished 6th in the Word of the Year voting in 09. :mrgreen:



in other news i reported before that i need to correct:
she left for Portugal yesterday. She will *start* the sailing there.
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

johnny_7713
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:31 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby johnny_7713 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:41 pm UTC

el_loco_avs wrote:I think the court did express a reluctance. They were not convinced there was no risk for Laura's social and psychological development, but because of the parent's unwillingness to cooperate a continuation of the evaluations while Laura was a ward of the court was pointless. Also they seemed to make a point of putting the responsibility (and there for consequences?) of the trip on Laura's parents.


Isn't that the whole point of the ruling though? Since Laura is no longer a ward of the court it is now the responsibility of the parents to let her go on this trip or not. Making Laura a ward of court makes the court responsible and therefore able to forbid the trip, this ruling returns the responsibility to the parents.

Also TheKrikkitWars, there are plenty of excuses for going missing at sea, even with the PLB. For starters hypothermia, probably less of a problem since ms Dekker is not going around Cape Horn and so can stick to warm waters, but still. A PLB will also not help you if are sleeping inside your cabin when your ship gets crushed under an oil tanker, all it will do is help rescue services find your corpse (assuming its attached to your corpse and not floating with some other wreckage). The Air France plane that crashed in the mid-Atlantic last year had a locator beacon attached to its black box, but last I heard that hasn't been found either.

Please, lets get something straight. There are significant risks involved with this trip. If the radio breaks, you cannot call for help. In the middle of the ocean there is no rescue service standing by to help you, certainly not within less than several hours. Even professional racing sailors on multi-million dollar boats equipped with all the latest safety gadgets get killed. If something serious goes wrong during a storm, a chase boat following you at several miles will not be there in time to help you. Plain and simple, if something goes wrong at a bad time (and that's when it will) you are on your own, period.

Can ms Dekker and her parents properly understand and evaluate these risks and her ability to handle them? The court thinks so, and since I don't know them personally that's good enough for me. Should ms. Dekker be allowed to take these risks? Yes. Certainly if she has the support of her parents. I wish her following winds and the best of luck, but can we please stop pretending that this trip isn't dangerous? (Significantly more dangerous than normal every day life, before someone points out the risks inherent in crossing the street).

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby SlyReaper » Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:44 pm UTC

johnny_7713 wrote:Can ms Dekker and her parents properly understand and evaluate these risks and her ability to handle them?


Seems the parents are themselves very experienced yachtsmen, so it seems likely that they know the risks.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu Aug 05, 2010 7:21 pm UTC

johnny_7713 wrote:Also TheKrikkitWars, there are plenty of excuses for going missing at sea, even with the PLB. For starters hypothermia, probably less of a problem since ms Dekker is not going around Cape Horn and so can stick to warm waters, but still. A PLB will also not help you if are sleeping inside your cabin when your ship gets crushed under an oil tanker, all it will do is help rescue services find your corpse (assuming its attached to your corpse and not floating with some other wreckage). The Air France plane that crashed in the mid-Atlantic last year had a locator beacon attached to its black box, but last I heard that hasn't been found either.


I never said it guaranteed your safety, but a proper Offshore Life Jacket and PLB should guarantee you'll turn up one way or another, combined with a surface immersion suit then it gives you the best possible odds of being alive for the PJ or Rescue Swimmer to pluck out of the drink.

People die doing the things they love, it's the way of the world... all you can do is take sensible precautions (in the slightly farsical sounding case of being run down by a tanker, not taking a nap in shipping lanes and using full nav lights at apropriate times.)
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

johnny_7713
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:31 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby johnny_7713 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 8:30 pm UTC

Fair enough. Although there's a distinct lack of rescue swimmers and PJs (para-jumpers?) in the middle of the ocean.

I guess I was singling you out unfairly but there seemed to be a general impression that sailing around the world on your own in a small boat is either a) not more dangerous than crossing the road, or b) you can just call for your mommy if things get scary and someone will come rescue you, neither of which is true.

Also nav-lights are not going to help much against being run over by a tanker. To give an idea, a couple of weeks ago I spent a holiday sailing on the North Sea. One day we were tacking (i.e. sailing up-wind) across the Jade shipping lane. According to the skipper the rule is: If you can see a container ship on the horizon you can't cross the lane before the ship runs over you, so don't attempt it. Being seen is definitely part of not getting run over, but far more important is that by the time the large ship sees you its probably far too late for it to be able to change course.

Having said all that, if Laura Dekker (and since she's a minor, her parents) is willing to take those risks to achieve her dream, then more power to her.

@SlyReaper: If you read the next sentence of my post, you'll see that I agree with you.

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:01 pm UTC

johnny_7713 wrote:Fair enough. Although there's a distinct lack of rescue swimmers and PJs (para-jumpers?) in the middle of the ocean.


PJ is short for Pararescue Jumper, a catchall name for the people who carry out Heli-Rescue (amongst other things) specifically the daft (and very brave) sods who get in the water when it's too rough to just use a winchman.

They are generally available anywhere in the world (USAF, the RAF, Icelandic and Irish Coastguards provide overlapping cover pretty much everywhere but the arctic ocean) in 4 hours... which could well be much, much too long if you're in cold water or extremely rough seas.

I'm aware that the sea is a bloody dangerous place, even a force 5 can make things uncomfortable, I've been caught out in a brief force 8 where all I could do was stay upright and try to hold my position, it died down after about 30 mins by which point I was so tired I could barely force myself to paddle back to shore.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:04 pm UTC

PJs don't step on the Big Foot.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:10 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:PJs don't step on the Big Foot.


Big Foot? where are you reffering to, or do you mean the Iconic tattos?

Edit: Africa? come to think of it, the nearest permanent cover to the west african coast is probably in Southern Britain (not counting the SADF, about whom I don't know much).
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Oregonaut » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:20 pm UTC

In the main hall of the Headquarters, where the PJs begin their Pipeline through Superman School, there is a big ass Green Foot, just like the tattoo. To step on this big ass Green Foot is strictly Verboten.

Hence, they don't step on the Big Foot.

I've got nothing but love for the PJs. I went through survival school at Fairchild, Underwater Egress training, and a few other courses with some PJs, good people, all of them.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:36 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:In the main hall of the Headquarters, where the PJs begin their Pipeline through Superman School, there is a big ass Green Foot, just like the tattoo. To step on this big ass Green Foot is strictly Verboten.


I understand now, incidentally I've just learned that my government wants to scrap our equivilent of the PJ's and privatise the provision of SAR... to say I've never heard a stupider idea seems nearly uncessarry, I've had contact with the SAR chaps from RAF Mountain Rescue whilst using one of the MOD owned climbing walls nearby and I can't think of anyone I'd be happier to see should I break myself somewhere nasty.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests