Most readers would be aware of 16-year old Qld teenager Jessica Watson's plans to sail solo around the world in a small yacht. After her unfortunate collision with a ship on the first night of a trial run from the Sunshine Coast to Sydney, there have been calls for the State to intervene on safety grounds and prevent her from embarking on her voyage.

Ms Wilson is well-prepared, has the full support of her parents and there is apparently no legal basis for State intervention. However, a poll being conducted at the Courier-Mail website currently stands at 57% against her continuing her journey.

My view is that she is a shining example for other young Australians, and should receive every encouragement to fufil her dream. If any of my kids were so inclined, I'd support them all the way. What do others think?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26055888-952,00.html

I'm naturally inclined at the opposite end of the spectrum. Dreams are one thing, but reality is another. If things go well for her it would be a great adventure, but if things go badly, it could be a shocker of a trip.

I've been out on scientific vessels in a big 70m steel-hulled ship and I can assure people that the seas can get scary at times. I imagine an around-the-world journey in a wooden-hulled yacht would throw up some nasties. What happens if it gets dismasted by a big wind or gets holed after hitting the proverbial "sunfish" or a floating steel container. The Sydney to Hobart race every year has shown how problematic conditions can become and how experienced yachtsmen can be overcome by the conditions. And that's just off the Australian coast. What happens if she has to troubleshoot a piece of equipment, like her radio, that stops functioning in the middle of the Pacific? That's where experience counts. How much is it going to cost to shadow her with surveillance aircraft etc?

My view, on the balance of probabilities, is that she'd be better off not going.

Of course she should go, and good luck to her. How many of us gave up driving after a minor stack?.

I don't agree with these adventurers being saved on our coin, but as long as she's - and everyone else who does it - is insured for rescue and stuff then I have no drama with it.

She could be on drugs, but she's not and she's setting a positive example for other kids. I only wish there were more like her for other kids to emulate.

I’m about to shout two teens a sky diving experience. I think it was Fractelles idea ages ago that I am finally seeing through. But will be my sons 18 year old girlfriend’s birthday present and my horrid 17 year old daughter accompanying.

Could go horribly wrong, will just be faster than a boat if it does.

This girl, all power to her. C’mon Rob, you know too much. Luckily I know nothing about sky diving accidents or stats thereof.

I'm more worried about teen parties, I'd rather my girl was on a boat alone somewhere.

This is getting to be a worry CJ. I agree she should go on, if she wants to.

There is nothing much to sailing a sound yacht, carefully, around the world. I could teach anyone who REALLY wanted to know, enough to do it, in a week or so.

Jessica could do with a little, & very little, coaching on safety, but she handled the result of this minor emergency very well. Jessica should have been advised not to sleep at night, on the northern NSW coast, it's just too dangerous. I am surprised she had not been advised of this, & the problem of lobster pots, & their bouys.

Her mistake was a common one, Cape moreton, & the Horn, are the most dangerous bits of her voyage. The Horn we all know about, but not Moreton.

Most people sailing south from Mooloolaba, make the same mistake. They set sail about midday, which puts them at Cape Morton around dark.

Cape Morton has the most shipping in the smallest area of any open sea part of the Oz coast. Due to the shape of the coast, & our east coast current, most ships bound to or from Sydney come in close there.

You can not expect a very large ship's crew to see a very small yacht, at sea, at night. They will be trying, but often not succeeding.

I have done that trip many times, often single handed. I slept during the day, without trouble, but I kept watch all night, every night, & it's a good thing I did.

On a number of occasions I had to take avoiding action from large ships, which seemed to be chasing me, intent on collision. They weren't of course, but a yacht, at 5 or 6 knots, takes some time to get well out of a ships general course. No they do not go straight, they wander a few degrees either side of their heading.

I hope someone, will advise her about small boat, coastal navigation techniques. Once she gets out into the real ocean, she will be much safer.

I'm afraid I don't quite see this as the 'shining example for other young Australians' that you do, CJ.

Sure, sailing is a healthy and wholesome way for young kids to pass the time, if you've got the parents to deck you out with a boat and all that is, which of course most don't.

Using the activity as a full scale claim for fame though is another thing entirely. This venture seems to me to be playing right into the unhealthy obsession that many young kids have these days with finding fame. Sure, it's promoting the pursuit of self-reliance and physical prowess at the same time, but it's all being done with too much fanfare for my liking.

I also have some problems with the self-serving nature of the venture. I'd be much more behind it if it was raising money for a worthwhile cause. As it is, all the money and publicity that's going into pursuing the dream of one young girl could I feel be put to much better use.

I'm also surprised at the choice of the pink and white and very girlie looking yacht. It seems designed to attract attention which I'm sure it will. We can only hope it's attention of the harmless variety.

I do hope too the venture is privately insured, though I'm sure if there's a major search and rescue needed at any time, it will be a bill picked up by taxpayers somewhere along the line.

I am pleased though that the State Government has had the good sense not to ban her from continuing. That would only have created a misplaced groundswell of support.

Hasbeen

<< Jessica should have been advised not to sleep at night, on the northern NSW coast, it's just too dangerous. >>

Yes, well let's just hope she's been better advised on the myriad of other things she'll need to know.

I largely agree with Bronwyn. The motivation for this exercise seems to be more about the mariner being young and female than about the challenge involved.

I do think some sort of waiver should be included if she needs to be rescued. As mentioned above, if the parentals can fit their teenager out with a yacht, they can afford to pay for the outcome of the expedition.

Shouldn't this girl be at school. If this stunt comes off she would be some sort of a hero, if it dont and ends in tragetty, she would be a first class idiot. I don't see any gains in this at all, the risks surely outweigh the gains.
A 16 year old is far to young, her parents need looking into. There has to be more behind this than just having the means to be able to do it.

Gad , I'm agreeing with Bronwyn again.

I worry that if a man I know, ex SAS had problems with pirates what price a 16 yo girl in a floating pink neon sign.
I wonder about the cost to bail her out of trouble or any lone yachts-person, for that matter .
Bullimore cost us 6-10 million. For what was an ego trip. That could have paid for a lot of help to the poor and destitute or research into something that would've benefited Aust.
Are the parents going to be able to cope or pay if the worst does happen? I doubt it.
As an adolescent, statistically she doesn't have a fully matured frontal cortex which controls reasoning. While she may be the exception I worry that this could be used as a example for other 16yo get e measured by, as CJ put it a shining example.....

I don't see how the exception is a shining example of anything but that exception.

To me this is an example of our twisted values. She gets all the publicity and sponsorship up to her earholes if she get back.
Yet the 4 average students that raised 4 million for charity get one headline and bye.

Notwithstanding the above she's entitled to waste her dad's money anyway they approve of. I'm just not interested in the hype or the stunt.

examinator

<< Gad , I'm agreeing with Bronwyn again. >>

:)

Don't know why you have to sound so worried about it!

Actually, I can't recall any issue where we've disagreed, but I guess there has been one somewhere along the line.

Of course she should go ahead.

Which of us would not welcome such an adventure in our lives, if only we had thought to do so when we had the opportunity?

The idea that some jumped-up clerk in State Government can decide whether or not you can go sailing, is utterly abhorrent to me.

Yet another sign that we are losing our every freedom, one by one, to a bunch of nay-saying cardigans.

What have we done to deserve to be ordered about by such a bunch of sad killjoys?

Gawd, I agree with CJMorgan!{down boy...}

Good luck to her. If it works out, fantastic; if it doesn't, she'll have had a go. If taxpayers have to foot the bill, so what?

If she gets killed, too bad.

There are no dress rehearsals in this life and that means that we have to take every opportunity to have a go at whatever is on offer. Fear and trepidation are often the best signs that something is worth doing.

I think it's insane!

A sixteen year old, inexperienced, who crashed
into a huge tanker on her trial run (how on
earth could she have missed seeing it?).

This all sounds like a publicity stunt - and at
what price?

No, I don't buy it. Why all the hoopla?
If her parents are sincere, why not then just let
her get on with it quietly - why get the press
involved? What's wrong with being a 'quiet achiever,'
if that's what this is really all about?

As a parent, I would have some serious doubts about
allowing a 16 year old on their own, to sail around
the world - no matter how much she wanted to do it.
She's not an adult to make that sort of a decision.
Her parents need to have their heads examined - or
their motives. Still, I believe there's a thriteen
year old in Europe, who's ready to have a go as well.
We can only hope and pray that they make it back alive.

I think that anyone who potentially places themselves at un-neccessary risk should either out up a bond, or, arrange insurance in case they require rescuing.

Remember, we can't even afford a decent health system in the country, let alone support for some 'thrill seeker'.

No offence but we anr'nt exactly flush with cash at this point in time.

I have a 16 year old daughter. There is no way on earth that I would condone her embarking on such an "adventure" regardless of how knowledgable she might be. I would be doing everything in my power to stop her. As others have stated, experienced male sailors have run into massive difficulties on such undertakings. How is it reasonable for a young and necessarily inexperienced woman to take this on? Yes, the fact that she is female is significant. A fit mature man will have much more strength and stamina than a young woman. The importance of this fact is multiplied when you're alone i.e. in a life and death situation there is no one to help you. Another not insignificant reason is that if she encounters individuals with less than desirable intentions as soon as she is identified as a lone female her chances of attack will skyrocket. She might and hopefully will have an incident free journey and return fit and well. Unfortunately I think the odds are well and truly stacked against this result.

You know what guys, now and again I get a teenager come to stay with me who has just lived in crap, no moments of glory or recognition. Boredom and nothingness has proceeded their placement and entire existence, moments of abuse were at the very least a variation on the theme and welcomed as such.

She might be spoilt, she might not be doing it for any other reason than wanting to, and she might be sucked in to a media circus.

If for no other reason than she is here and having fun I wish her god speed.

I have a 17 year old daughter and I would do everything in my power to dissuade her from going on such a dangerous journey!

No doubt the young sailors parents would need to be bankrolling this trip? How would they feel if it leads to a tragedy?
She is too young to have had enough experience in dealing with the inevitable problems ahead.

Maybe she could just try a trip around Australia first?
What of pirates out there?

This is far more dangerous than letting her learn to drive or go out to nightclubs surely?
If seasoned yachties get into trouble, what chance has she?

Interesting responses - thanks everybody. The Courier-Mail poll is currently running at 55% against her continuing, and we seem to be similarly divided here.

I must confess that I was a sailing nut when I was young, and read Slocum, Chichester, Rose etc in my teens. A bit later in life I knew a remarkable middle-aged woman who circumnavigated the globe solo in her 26-foot Folkboat, only to founder on a rock at the entrance to Sydney's Pittwater after she'd returned. My favourite teacher from primary school (also a woman) also did the same thing but didn't sink her boat.

It's always been my dream to do something similar, but now that I'm in a position where I could do so if I really wanted, I doubt that my physical health would permit me. However, it would have been a relative doddle when I was 16 and fit as a trout.

I agree with those who cite risk and mental immaturity as good reasons that Jessica should not continue to pursue her dream. However, I've no doubt that she and her family have discussed these negative factors extensively and come to the conclusion that she is capable of overcoming them. They could well be tragically wrong, but I don't think that it's essentially a different issue from allowing kids to go surfing, dinghy sailing or rock climbing etc without adult supervision.

One of the problems I see with contemporary young people is that too many are insulated from actual physical risks and the mental challenges that come with them, and seek the satisfaction and adrenalin rush that one derives from such activities in 'safer' activities like taking drugs and playing virtual reality computer games. It certainly isn't for everyone, but I think for exceptional young people like Jessica Watson the undertaking of an actual grand adventure is likely to provide her with excellent grounding for life as a capable, self-reliant adult.

But that's just my opinion :)

P.S. I'll only be online sporadically for the next week or so.

We have been boaties forever and my extended family could support a ships chandlery. We have mainly engine driven craft and up to 54', the smallest being 40'.

This is not the adventure that any of our family would contemplate as a 'stretch' challenge for a sixteen year old. At that age they cannot be expected to have the maturity of mind and body to cope with the ravages of a long voyage where some legs are unavoidably long. The sea is unforgiving and if one reads the logs of around the world sailors one can easily see why this youth should not be going without an adult companion.

The collision is evidence of what we already know about teens, that they cannot always be expected to have the mental discipline, aforethought and tenacity that is needed. It is stupid to say that the ship came from behind or that its watch 'should' have seen her,as master of her vessel she should have been watching visually and on radar and taken necessary avoiding action well in advance to ensure that a collision was not possible.

Unlike land lubbers and their vehicles, the international rules for navigation at sea make mariners responsible to avoid dangerous circumstances through intelligent forethought and especially, maintaining effective watch. How could she go below for a nod when she was still in the shipping lane and there was another vessel on a possible collision course with her? Why didn't she set a course well away, or get on her radio (she would still have been the one to take avoiding action)?
//2..

2/..(contd)

Let youth have challenges but we are not fulfilling our duty as adults if we do not give timely and proper guidance - which in some cases could be restriction or removal of the means for them to be harmed. Fortune might see this girl arrive safely home, but no mentor of young mariners would ever encourage reliance on luck and fair weather. The odds are stacked against her and that is plain stupid.

It is the parents wishing to bask in her reflected glory that she needs to gain independence from and she could do that by having a study year off in (say) Ireland.

Third post sorry but just to pick up a misunderstanding by some that you can actually have day or night sleeps on a solo passage.

'Sleeps' while solo navigating are restricted by the need to keep watch and by the weather. Radar and natural eye view are very limited on a small craft so where there could be other vessels or hazards there could be no sleep until the danger passes or if one is lucky, one hour on and one off watch.

In the open sea there are still ships and it is a constant source of surprise where they pop up. Regrettably, there is rarely a vessel within thousands of (nautical) miles when disaster strikes - which could be in the form of a sudden squall, a half-submerged shipping crate or Murphy's Law.

Even seasoned sailors become seasick in a small craft and there are other common ailments/injuries that make the lone voyager feeble and affect decisions. Capacity to withstand loneliness - which will hit her hard - is best tested in smaller hops over some years, rather than by throwing caution to the winds and setting off of the biggie.

Just for info:

http://www.cbssports.com/worldsports/story/12120498

http://www.oldsaltblog.com/2009/07/19/teenagers-sailing-around-the-world-alone/

http://adventuretravel.about.com/b/2009/07/06/would-you-let-your-teen-sail-around-the-world-alone.htm

http://www.jessicawatson.com.au/

Brony,
Not a real problem....I figure I'm at risk of losing my weirdo status.
But.... I do point to you being underwhelmed with my number five on traffic ...saved! there is some hope for me yet(whew).

How egocentric is that?
I know... (sigh or resignation)the corner. You know I'm gonna finish up with a triangular shaped head from OLO :-)

I started riding motorcycles when I was 17 and I'm still here. My heart says good luck to Jessica Watson, other young sailors have made it, why shouldn't she?

My one problem, PINK? She had to go with the colour pink! Am I missing some irony here or is Jessica a major fan of Pink (the singer)?

Not a single one of my motorcycles was pink, nor my cars. In fact, I may have a deep bias against this colour. On further contemplation, maybe I just need to get over this pink issue.

Good luck Jessica, live your dream, not enough of us do.

Fractelle let me explain PINK. (btw if you were being humorous again I’m going to feel so set up)

Men took all the other colours, it is all we have.

We can fight it, hate it, reject it, but the sad fact is that PINK is our colour, gay men often try and take PINK from us in many subtle ways and it just not bloody okay. Now and again a heterosexual male will think he is being all sensitive with his new pink shirt on – it should be ripped from his back by the first woman that spots the thief.

We need to reclaim PINK, be proud of PINK.

As females we cannot let anyone take PINK, we must fight for PINK, adore PINK, and hold PINK close.

Dammit it woman, get out there and buy something PINK. No it doesn't matter if the colour makes you want to vomit, that is not the point!

PP,
I agree that individuals like you see need some purpose/goals etc. THIS won't help your foster children or their reality.

Fun will wear off very quickly for this young woman.

All
The other concern I have is how some parents influence their children in pursuits for vicarious reasons. Just watch the footy dads and stage mums etc.

It's one thing to encourage a child to take up active pursuits but another thing entirely to encourage extremes. imagine if this young woman had doubts what sort of conflicts about national embarrassment, sense of failure, letting down her parents must have gone through her mind. Peer pressure can be deadly at that age ...think about it.

Let's assume she does know some of the possible consequences I would question (no more than) does she really UNDERSTAND the possible lasting less than glorious consequences.
E.g. Ask an 18 yo about the possible consequences of their hairy reaction time dependent driving (male/female) and then look at the road stats.Then ask a young risk taker, that things went wrong 20+ year down the track with its limitations/pain it's had on their lives and will continue too.
I've counseled people in this and almost all of them now say it wasn't worth it.
Risk,(not extreme) if there is a real purpose is life but first ask someone who is equipped/experienced enough to answer it...Cornflower is spot on.

Consider too the other extreme too. I seemed to remember the boy who did a similar thing told of how after being becalmed for 7 days started hallucinating. Sure she has radio and back up but they have limitations and can fail.

For her sake I hope it comes off even so it still doesn't change the facts This is in the final analysis a pointless Folly. Her energy determination could have been channeled into something more meaningful than being TEMPORARILY the youngest to s/h sail around the what ever.

Piper

ROFL

Pink is like the loser, left over colour. Like the skinniest runtiest kid selected for a team (BTW I was that kid; skinny although not runty, but crap at sport).

Besides the wearing of pink makes me look like a giant fairy - long blond hair, blue eyes - don't need the addition of pink. I am an androgyne trapped in a feminine body.

I fully comprehend what you are saying, but I just can't bring myself to do it.

Does being a fan of Pink excuse my pinkphobia?

Awaiting your sage advice on this vexing issue.

Oh funny… I was complete runt, kept getting sent home by teachers who thought I was unwell whereas it was just my natural state. Thank goodness for puberty.

Being a bit of a tomboy myself I also have an aversion to Pink (not the singer, love her) that I constantly need to fight. I do draw the line at actually wearing it although unlike yourself (you have the same features as my daughter) I am a curly haired green eyed monster, I mean brunette.

Now the secret to incorporating pink in to your life as a female over 4 years old is to do it all nonchalant like – a hot pink fruit bowl or one bright pink cushion on your couch. Subtle but sends a clear message to any visitor “Yeah that’s right I am a chick and I own that colour so you and your trouser snake can just step back”.

Jessica has embraced pink, it is more a screaming message of “take note; I am very young and very female!” I may have advised my own daughter to travel in a black boat and wear an eye patch although knowing her she would have done it without the advice.

Exam you are right, nothing will change the lives of my own fostered teens. But if for a moment it makes them say “oh wow” that will do. Mine have been known to hallucinate and I wish it was because they spent seven days in the doldrums.

Oh and I asked Hubby – he said no way, would not let her go. But he is a “No” man, you know the sort of person that says “no” before thinking. Can I play outside “no”, why? “Because I said no”, Kids have learnt to come to me at all times, I am the opposite and say “yes” so that I am not asked any more questions.

Piper

Hmmmm, hot pink fruit bowl has possibilities, but a PINK cushion? Next ,lace will suddenly make an appearance and then where will I be? Major identity crisis. People make enough assumptions based on my outward appearance as it is. Anyway, now I think of it, I do have a pink flamingo fridge magnet - it even has a thermometer in it. I find it quite hilarious.

Exam

Jessica could get hit by a Mac Truck next time she crosses the road. Life is risk. Even the tamest of us take a risk just getting out of bed each morning.

Girls have so few powerful role models, did I hear someone say Paris Hilton? You're dead meat.

Fact: we will all die, sooner or later. If Jessica succeeds with her dream, imagine all the positives and even if she never returns - she tried, dammit. We wrap up our children in cotton wool, especially girls. For the next generation I would like to see resourceful, independent people, not afraid of challenges and not fearing to question others. Keeping kids safe is really just another way to try and control them. This world is not ever going to be safe, best we teach our children how to navigate it.

Fractelle

<< For the next generation I would like to see resourceful, independent people, not afraid of challenges and not fearing to question others. >>

I totally agree with this sentiment. I'm not entirely risk averse myself and I absolutely don't believe in the super protectiveness of many parents today.

The risk being taken here though is one that sits on a rather grand scale. If Jessica does come seriously unstuck and needs to be rescued, she's likely to put other lives at risk and will most definitely incur a huge cost that someone else will have to pay.

Whether one is sixteen or sixty, this type of venture to me is a very self-centred way to prove ones resourcefulness and independence. There are lots of other ways to meet personal challenges, and while they mightn't generate the same degree of publicity and self glory, they don't by necessity place a heavy burden on others if things go wrong.

When Jessica sets off, she will be just one of qiute a few thousand people sailing around the world, at any one time. It's no big deal.

I have known dozens of yachties, who have sailed from the UK, & the USA, to Oz. For a very large percentage of them, up arounf 70%, the roughest conditions they have had, was in the Tasman.

Jessica will start by crossing the Tasman, probably to pass south of NZ. This could take from 10 to 20 days. With any luck, she will get a thrashing, on that passage, most do.

AS she passes NZ she should have enough experience of what she is in for, to be able to make a choice to go on or not.

I agree it would have been best to go quitely, & return noisily, but there are probably sponsers requiring publicity. I always made a piont if telling no one where or when I was going somewhere. I still suffered from officious people wanting to control me, from time to time.

On one occasion, I was anchored at Store Beach, Sydney harbour, waiting for a southerly, to set off for the Solomon Islands. A harbour patrol bloke came up, asking what I was doing. Thinking he was being friendly, I told him.

He then demanded, to know where my dan bouy, & life ring were. These are safty gear to throw to someone who falls overboard. I told him they were stowed up forward, for the passage.

I pointed out that I was single handed, with no one to throw them to me, should I fall overboard, & they were actually a hazard, when I accessed the self steering, particularly at night.

He demanded I get them out, & install them, or he would prevent me leaving. I pointed out that mine was a British registered ship, & I would charge him with piracy, if he touched it. He left.

This peanut wanted to throw his weight around, for no better reason than to prove he was a twit. People, don't be one of those.

Brony,

Damn I was going to say that...just not as clearly and concisely.

Fractelle

What she said (cheesy grin)
I would add Proportion fraccy baby ( :-) ) proportion.....compare the actuary tables of risk between the two.

Bronwyn and Examinator

I understand your concerns, BUT I wonder how much is due to the fact Jessica is young and female. There have already been successful voyages made by teenage boys.

I agree that the issue of the cost incurred rescuing people is a problem, perhaps there should be a mandatory insurance policy before anyone sets out.

But I wouldn't stop anyone whose dream is to sail single handed and I get sea sick after just 5 minutes on a boat! But then I have motorcycled from Adelaide to Sydney (on my own) along the coast. Run down the side of Uluru - and not even stumbled. And, erm, discovered just how fast a Mazda rotary could go without getting caught (BTW the speedo hand went to 200 and the car was still accelerating... sigh) These are things I will never do again. But I am glad to know I have tested myself. There are other dangerous things I have done, but I think I have made my point. Yes, I do (did) enjoy the adrenalin.

We will have to agree to disagree. I admire Jessica and wish her and all the other crazy mountain climbers, building abseilers, hang gliders, kite surfers, racing car drivers every bit of luck - they'll need it.

Fractelle,
It has little to do with her being female per se.
Her age and female isn't an interest to me but I can't say the same for pirates, those with axes to grind (terrorists). Girls/females always engender more sympathy especially pretty (blond++) ones. Therefore a better splash in the media or larger ransom.
Consider the males in Asian jails and their limited media attention a pretty convicted drug dill still gets attention why?
Fractelle this is reality is it right? probably not.

Do I sanction your breaking the speed limits No are you/anybody a role model for having done this? No, Not because of any delusions of superiority of any anal sense either. Simply a wider focus on the co-victims and others who have to clean up individual selfishness. Sure everybody does it but is it right should we encourage it by normalizing it? I can't change my past but I can influence my future.

Again there is a difference between sky diving and the extreme of sailing around the watzis.

By the way the boys did it when the increased risk of terrorists making a point and high tech over armed pirates were such a problem.

And yes I think the same applies for boys/young men too. IMO any such extreme thrill seeking says more about the failings in/of the lifestyle and the individual than the 'courage' (role model status) involved.
It's their choice But I don't have to agree with it.

Some here have said that Jessica is inexperienced.
She is not, as she has been sailing since she could walk.
I understand she sailed with her parents around the Pacific.

The ship that hit her, I was sure that ship's radars have proximity
alarms. Was it turned off ? Was it it set to too great a distance so
it didn't disturb the crew ?

I remember a story about a yachtsman who was grazed by a big ship,
he fired a flare which landed on the bridge and burned brightly.
It still didn't wake them up.

CJ, I don't have a clue why my opinion or anybodies else's on this matters in the slightest. Whether she goes or not it her and her families decision. I am not about to cast judgement either way.

For those of you saying she could not possibly do it: I disagree. I was a keen sailor myself at that age. Travelling around the world in a small boat it certainly a challenge, but there is no reason any fit skilled sailor could not do it. The principle challenge is not sailing the boat. If she has been sailing since she could walk, this will easy for her. If she has helped out for maintenance and repair her boats, keeping the boat seaworthy will be natural to her. If her family has let her go camping and exploring with her mates, looking after herself won't be anything new either.

In fact, from the comments it appears you lot seem to think she is about to go out in a big wide, metropolitan world full of lots nasty people, on her own. That would be a problem if it were so. But she is not, she is doing the reverse in fact. It is unlikely she will see too many people during her travels. My guess is the biggest challenge will be putting up with her own company for a few months. I'd bet she hasn't done that before, and only she and her parents will know if she is up for it.

Examinator, do you know what this kid is going to do? It doesn't sound like it.

If you do know, then leave the red herrings out of it please.

She will be doing the typical "round the world" trip, used by many races, & single handed "adventurers".

She will get down into the 40s, & sail, down wind, around the world, dipping down, a bit further south to round the horn, & perhaps Tasmania, to avoid Bass Straight.

Since the clippers retired there are no shipping routs down there, although there may be a few ships in the Tasman.

No shipping means no pirates, & I don't think there are too many terrirosts down there either. No percentage blowing yourself up, with no journalists to report your big bang. She will be so far from anywhere, that without a beacon, transmiting her position, even a squadron of search aircraft would have trouble finding her.

If the radar signature of her yacht is so small, that a bulk freighter can't see her, pirates, if there were any, would struggle, too.

These unassisted passages mean no stops, in ports, so she won't be near much habitation at all, & a very long away from any outboard mounted pirates.

Her main problem would be a big wave, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. I have a mate who's bigger yacht was turned over, just off Newcastle NSW, so that type of stuff is just luck, & can happen anywhere.

Hasbeen,

You may be correct.

We in Aust, via our media only hear about the the spectacular ones
remember the piracy of the Russian ship in the Baltic?

As I said a person I know, an ex SAS (lone sailor) was attacked by wannabe pirates crossing the Atlantic. A 28 yr veteran big ships' captain (small crew)had problems with pirates in the Pacific Nth of the horn.
Not all attacks are in the Middle east, Asia,or in the Timor Sea.

Piracy and terrorism ARE world issues today in our post "911 response" world. Are they odds on? No! but Red herrings? not really. To not to factor that and a million other risks many heightened by the age/vulnerability but not factoring them in naivety wanton and denial. The risk is way more risky/dangerous than local east coast sailing. Consider the whole argument I put up not pick cherry pick to discredit the opinion.

My lack of regard for this type of stunt still stands as does my questioning of the wisdom of allowing a less than 18 yo (legal age the age they can make the decision for themselves.) to do such pointless risks.
Likewise I distrust role models of this kind. IMO They don't achieve anything...except the wow ego factor.

Clearly you believe it proves something which is fine but I don't.

It is amusing that some who imagine that this sixteen year old is competent enough to understand the risks and make informed consent to this dangerous voyage recently decried NRL footballers for taking advantage of a 'vulnerable' eighteen year old women who pursued them for sex.

What is so different about sex that women, especially those accepted as adult enough to make informed decisions to vote and undertake legal contracts, cannot make informed consent and men have to be responsible for them?

Possible loss of life to be the youngest to circumnavigate the globe solo for attention-seeking mum and dad is no problem, but womanly regret (will they still love and respect me?) the day after adding a few more celebrity footballer scalps to her belt is a tragedy and the men involved should be castigated. Go figure!

Cornflower

Awesome!

You have managed to link NRL sex scandals to a young yachtswoman's ambition to circumnavigate the globe.

I doff's me cap at what can only be considered:

'TENUOUS SEGUE OF 2009'

NO NO NO! Just another little rich gal getting what she wants.
As in the past it will cost the taxpayers millions for the navy to make a rescue.
An another case of 'Stage perants'

Cornflower,
I see the apparent irony and the point you're making and raised an interesting more analytic thread to the topic . Why the apparent conflicting logic.
I guess it all goes back to the cultural conditioning, at this level it emphasises Yabby's point about the effect of hormones on the still developing adolescent mind. Having said that it still doesn't fully justify total abandonment rational considerations of the issues in our societal context.

Personally I would level the same standards on Males and females.

I have seen it argued that nature hasn't yet caught up to our intellectual/cultural perspectives/capacities i.e. we were never genetically intended to live as long as we do and therefore breed at a younger age for a time when breeding was a risky activity. Like the TV show said adolescents/ young adults are seemingly made to engage in risky behaviour. This creates conflicts with our post bestial cultural reasoning, duty of care and risk assessment .

The net result is this discussion topic.

Hasbeen

<< When Jessica sets off, she will be just one of qiute a few thousand people sailing around the world, at any one time. It's no big deal. >>

<< She will be doing the typical "round the world" trip, used by many races, & single handed "adventurers". >>

You can try all you like, Hasbeen, to paint this endeavour as an ordinary everyday walk in the park. The fact remains that many people, experienced sailors amongst them, consider lengthy solo sailing voyages to constitute an unacceptable level of risk.

Many who've made these voyages themselves argue that there should always be a minimum of two on board, so that careful watch can be maintained at all times, emergency situations handled more effectively with two heads and pairs of hands to tackle them and isolation and loneliness kept at bay.

Long term solo sailing is a high risk activity for anyone. Throw into the mix the natural immaturity of youth, the lack of life experience and the common gender disadvantage of a slight build and many would argue that the risk rises to the level of irresponsibility.

Fractelle

<< We will have to agree to disagree. I admire Jessica and wish her and all the other crazy mountain climbers, building abseilers, hang gliders, kite surfers, racing car drivers every bit of luck - they'll need it. >>

Fortunately, I don't have your need to experience that adrenalin rush because if I did, unlike you, I doubt I'd still be around! I do have sympathy for those who do though and I see it as a compelling argument. But as I've made the point ad nauseam now (I'm sorry!), I think the risk that one's own risk taking imposes on others has to be taken into account. A line has to be drawn somewhere and I see long solo sailing voyages as crossing that line.

It might just be adrenalin differences, Fractelle, that have you and I crossing that line at different points! :)

Bronwyn

As always you have presented your view in a fair and reasonable manner.

Posting to this forum would be less of a challenge if we agreed on everything. Regardless of which side of the line upon which our opinions may fall, I regard you as one of the rational influences of the often perplexing mix of OLOers. And I always look forward to reading your opinion.

I do admit to having lived dangerously and to quote Paul Kelly done "all the dumb things" and lived to tell the tale, many don't and I have no idea why I have been spared when others have not.

I am not 100% committed to the idea that people should just race off on whatever quest takes their fancy. However, if they insist on doing so, then I'll be there to offer support and celebrate their return or commiserate.

Its probably a good thing I live three hours drive from my young niece and nephew (my sister is far more middle-of-the-road than I) so I am not too much of a 'bad' influence.

Cheers

Hey Fractelle, you’d hate my household, drives me nuts how safe I have to be, safety mats everywhere – Allegation Team will come rushing in and emotionally traumatise any child that has a decent bruise. “Duty of Care” gone stupid stupid stupid.

I am constantly saying “slow down” “get off it isn’t safe” “be careful” on and on, now my own kids when little just went for it with bumps and bruises and scrapes as a daily part of a fun childhood. Hooning through the bush, tipping over wasp nests – all part of living life and natural consequences.

My son who is terrified of heights did a bungee jump not long ago, nearly in tears but he did it – good on him, the poofta.

I think we both feel Jessica is going to go an adventure; we’re probably both a little jealous and would love to be in her shoes and be given that amazing opportunity at that age. The thought of her sailing off makes us smile. The risk involved, well that is what makes it amazing.

The thought of anyone wishing to stop her annoys us, the killjoys.

Hey I just called out to my daughter Have you heard of Jessica Watson – “Yeah!”, she goes (shouting from the bathroom), “She’s an actress I think, google her!”. So I yell back at her who it is and what she wants to do and her reply “What an idiot!”. Fractelle anytime you feel like coming to my house and slapping my daughter around for awhile you just let me know.

Piper

The irony is that as a child I was a shy, timid, skinny thing - although I always watched with envy the kids who would dive into rivers, or mono-wheel their BMX's. Then one day, I entered the world of adolescence, hormones invaded my being and I have only really slowed down now - ME being a significant influence.

Yes I do envy Jessica; so let's watch her sail towards the horizon of the rest of her life taking with her a little bit of all who would venture away from the limits of this corner of the world, but restrained by responsibilities, commitments and the expectations of others.

Bronwyn, "The fact remains that many people, experienced sailors amongst them, consider lengthy solo sailing voyages to constitute an unacceptable level of risk."

Agreed. I am sure that few posters have any idea of the risks. No way I would put my daughter's life at risk when the commonsense and the rules of navigation at sea are so at odds with the undertaking. The first concern of the skipper is the safety of all on board and the vessel, yet this small craft will be so short-handed that an effective watch cannot be maintained and the skipper is inexperienced and untried in major voyages.

North Coast Qld to Sydney is enough for her and leave the biggie for another day. But then there is bugger all media interest in a short trip and there is the rub.

Fractelle, '"I do admit to having lived dangerously and to quote Paul Kelly done "all the dumb things" and lived to tell the tale'

Be assured that your judgement is still poor where you would counsel others to do the same.

Oh Cornflower, we might not be able to work out why are kids do what they do at times but surely most parents know their own children’s capabilities and skills.

Young Jessica I wouldn’t send in to situations I know my daughter could handle and I wouldn’t send my girl around the world in a boat.

If her parents have decided she can do it then I would suggest they know more about her and the risks than any of us. And if something goes wrong I’m sure they will suffer more grief than any of us.

If DoCS stepped in and forbid this would we agree with that? Is this what we want?

I hate the suggestions that these are parents making bad choices; they have raised an extremely confident and talented young person.

Fractelle I think this was beautifully said:

“…so let's watch her sail towards the horizon of the rest of her life taking with her a little bit of all who would venture away from the limits of this corner of the world, but restrained by responsibilities, commitments and the expectations of others.”

TPP

It is the responsibility of the parents not the regulator.

It is a judgement call by the parents and the rewards and penalty are known. The risks of solo circumnavigation are well documented.

It is a record attempt and we the consumers are the ones who have put the pressure on. The financial reward of being the youngest to do 'X' is large enough to change the whole future of her family. The media wins either way of course.

How free, willing and informed is her consent? Can she as a minor even give an unpressurised, informed consent in the circumstances?

God speed, fair weather and best of luck.

For the urgers, what age is too young for solo circumnavigation?

Cornflower, I have now idea how young is too young, It depends on the person. I do know how old is too old, & i'm it.

This is a lonely trip, but she'll have radio. It is also very boring, with weeks of very little to do. That will hopefully be the most difficult thing for her. It would be for me.

I like a new island, & people after a week or so. Much more fun.

I did 53,000 nautical miles, around the Pacific, in my yacht, without any major adventures. I did lay a'hull for 72 hours, in a cyclone, in the Solonon Sea, but that was only a little worrying, because, in those days, before sat nav for us peasants, I had no real idea how far I may have drifted, with no sun for navigation.

Provided she doesn't get very unlucky, & get a big wave, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, it's really not that hard.

I too, wish her luck.

As expected, the skills of a mid-teen who has never even done a longer solo voyage are not up to what is required for a solo navigation:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26125924-952,00.html

It is a reckless undertaking and her parents should have more sense. Jessica herself does not have the skills to assess her own risks.

The Courier Mail reportage to which Cornflower has provided a link, contains, among other things, this statement with respect to a Maritime Safety Queensland report on Jessica's recent collision:

"The report says that after the vessels separated, with Jessica's yacht dismasted, she contacted the skipper of the Silver Yang by radio and received an apology and a pledge to pay for the damages."

I am assuming, as a landlubber, that the skipper of the Silver Yang's apology and pledge arises out of the law of the sea that 'steam gives way to sail'. It would be interesting to hear more from somebody like Hasbeen as to why such a seeming admission of responsibility on the part of the bulk carrier may have been made.

The third last paragraph of the Courier Mail item says:

"Government authorities have analysed legislation in an attempt to prevent Ms Watson from embarking on the gruelling test. But the laws indicate that Jessica – who will become a legal adult when she turns 17 next May – needs only the approval of her parents to start the journey."

The last paragraph of the news item says:

"But The Courier-Mail understands high-ranking government officials were alarmed by the facts of the collision once they became known."

Do I detect an empire-building agenda here on the part of Maritime Safety Queensland? Is there a tenaciously held desire on the part of bureaucrats to alter the law at the expense of the long-held freedoms of Australians to set sail upon the high seas? Does Hasbeen's little tin Hitler now hold a high position in MSQ, I wonder? Or is something else going on that has little directly to do with Jessica Watson's proposed voyage?

Interestingly, the ATSB acting director of surface safety investigations is reported as saying:

"In this case, I believe the (yacht) had some equipment that should have enhanced its detectability and certainly the bigger ship, at this stage, is indicating that they did see her."

BTW, since when does a child attain to its majority upon turning 17?

So Cornflower is able to say 'I told you so!'. The only problem is that the content of her link, and the necessary implications thereof in no way back up her claim.

On the Brisbane Courier Mail 'newspaper' website, to which Cornflower provided a link in her post of Saturday, 26 September 2009 at 7:54:43 AM, there is a news item by Courier Mail (?) journalists Michael Crutcher and Greg Stolz, with "Additional reporting by [Courier Mail journalist] Jeremy Pierce", dated September 26, 2009 12:00am in which the opening sentence reads:

"Jessica Watson and her parents have been warned by authorities to call off the 16-year-old's solo voyage around the world after a damning assessment of her skills."

Whilst this news item claims that "The Courier-Mail has obtained a copy of the report into a collision between Jessica's yacht and a Chinese bulk carrier this month ....", the internal link constituted by the highlighted words 'collision between .... bulk carrier' do not link to that report but simply to (yet?) another AAP sourced item by one Stephen Johnson datelined September 10, 2009 12:00am. It would have been nice to be able to assess the significance of the facts revealed by the official investigation for ourselves. The internally-linked Courier Mail page, in contrast to Cornflower's link, takes absolutely forever to load fully. After reading its content, I can only think this slow loading may have been made deliberately so because the reportage was no longer 'convenient' for the editorial line now evidently being taken by the Courier Mail.

An entirely different light is cast upon the circumstances surrounding the collision by the internally linked AAP sourced item by Stephen Johnson. In it, the (Commonwealth) ATSB acting director of surface safety investigations is reported as saying "In this case, I believe the (yacht) had some equipment that should have enhanced its detectability and certainly the bigger ship, at this stage, is indicating that they did see her."

Large shipping operators wanting rights to sail close inshore without having to observe the rules?

In my preceding post I questioned whether:

"Large shipping operators want[ed] rights to sail close inshore without having to observe the rules?"

Hasbeen, who has been there and done all this, in his post of Friday, 11 September 2009 at 12:54:25 PM observes:

"Cape Moreton has the most shipping in the smallest area of any open sea part of the Oz coast. Due to the shape of the coast, & our east coast current, most ships bound to or from Sydney come in close there."

Australian governments, unwilling or unable to mandate a shipping route further out to sea in the vicinity of Cape Moreton, seem to have left it to an unholy alliance of 'jumped-up clerks in State government' and the Brisbane Courier Mail to help shove the cost of making watchkeeping easier on large vessels onto the Australian boating public. Whether these governments are responding to the wishes of big shipping interests (it costs more to sail against the East Australian current than closer inshore), or are simply hosts to parasitic little tin Hitler bureaucrats seeing an opportunity for more power, is not immediately clear.

Hasbeen's observation contains the key to revealing the truth behind the Courier Mail's editorial line in this story. That editorial line has seen the Courier Mail attempting to 'grandstand' upon the motherhood issue as to the self-evident riskiness to a young woman of a solo circumnavigation of the world. It has presumptuously taken a poll as to whether Jessica Watson should be 'allowed' to go; a poll which I daresay it would not have been so bold as to undertake if Jessica was already legally an adult. That poll, however, was doubtless intended to provide a justification for legislation imposing more costs and restrictions upon ALL Australian recreational boat owners and operators. (Yes, Cornflower, YOUR "boaties forever" family, too!)

Re-read these links carefully:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26125924-952,00.html

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26050546-5019132,00.html

It seems Jessica wasn't at fault! Even sheer Courier Mail spin and misleading headlines cannot hide that truth.

Hear Drake's drum, anyone?

Forrest Gumpp: "It seems Jessica wasn't at fault! "

The fact that they saw each other doesn't mean Jessica doesn't share some of the blame. While there is (or at least was - it been decades since I sailed) a law of the sea that says motorised vessels must give way to sail, every sailor should know it is simply impossible for large ships to do that. The bottom line is taking a nap when a large ship is that close in a constrained channel wasn't the smartest thing for Jessica to do. If wind changes in Morten bay are typical of other places close to land, and her boat was self steering using the wind (very likely) her boat could have ended up anywhere. It was a mistake - just inexperience on her part, I guess. I imagine that mistake is what prompted that much hyped letter sent to her.

It was interesting to see the thing the media is focusing on - the transmitting device she was supposed to have on, was utterly irrelevant since both vessels had already seen each other. The media also rabbited on about her not using some device that warned her of a ship being in close proximity. When I read it I marvelled at the new fangled technology that come along since I sailed. But then all reporting of it vanished, so I presume it was the media getting it wrong yet again.