Piracy makes a comeback

[ICantSpellDawg]

Did you miss that in most cases the boarding is accomplished before the crew are aware of it ?

Why are they not aware of it? Maybe people who are professionally "Aware of it" should travel aboard those ships.

Interesting , yet Somaliland is disputed territory and they havn't got their act together anymore than Puntland or any other of the clan based fiefdoms in Somalia , in fact Somaliland might end up worse since the clan that claims power there makes up only 1/3 of the population and the other clans and their warlords are not happy bunnies over the situation .
A nice idea Tuff but full of problems , do you go for the federal approach or the confederation ? Independance or autonomy ?
How do you recognise clan based states when all the clans have overlapping claims ?
How do you recognise them when their claims include other countries territory ?
As I said Tuff , an interesting thought , a very interesting one indeed .
But would you like to think about it a bit more?

All territory is disputed. I say that we side with the areas that seem to have options beyond piracy. We can side with areas that have a tourism industry.

We could help create a Federal Government in Exile centered in Hargeysa. There would be overlap, but it would help ensure that Somaliland was technically part of a future effective Somalia. Somaliland would operate as it does while Somalian coalitions in exile experimented in the safety of a functional nation. Puntland would be invited to sit at that table.

What is your solution? There has to be one. Comfortable people have a moral obligation to help the uncomfortable.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Arming the crew is not desirable unless one wants the Wild Wild West on the High Seas. Using firearms on an oil tanker would be akin to lighting a match in a powder magazine. However non-lethal means are available and have been used to repel some attacks. Fire hoses, bright spot lights, and the ship's klaxon are the most common. Bulkhead doors that can't be opened from the outside for the bridge, engine room, and crew compartments are also cost effective defense mechanisms. There's even electrified fencing. However, a security system and procedures are only as good as the captain & crew's diligence and training in following them. Security procedures, done properly, are inconvenient, which is what makes them effective. Complacency, inadequate training and human error will compromise the best system every time.

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship? Yes, as an option it would reduce the number of bullets traveling away from the ship, but who cares about those? Pirates would be shooting at the boat aiming at guys controlling hoses instead of guys shooting firearms.

Good sentiment, though - something needs to be done and simply nay saying anyone's ideas isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

(ASIDE - Hosa: what do you think about Giuliani and his possibility of picking up Hillary's or Patterson's seat? There is a discussion going on in the election thread.)

[Tribesman]

Why are they not aware of it? Maybe people who are professionally "Aware of it" should travel aboard those ships.

What you mean like people who are professionally trained about the safety of the ship and its crew ...like errrrrrr.....ships officers .

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship?

Gunfire isn't the problem

[Papewaio]

Come on ...
You don't need armed personell onboard. All you need is a Norwegian captain .

Because as we all know, if a Norwegian captain is in trouble he will soon have Australian SAS 'protecting him' ...

[ICantSpellDawg]

We could also simply protect American Traders. If Pirate towns are booming, sooner or later Pirate Lords will have assets and savings to protect. In order to better protect those assets they will probably prefer agreements between themselves instead of land based extremists taking their share of pirate booty- thus the beginning of government. Let those nations foolish enough to move goods through the region contribute to illegitimate Somali growth.

This is one option, but it requires selfishness and washes hands of responsibility. This is most likely the one Tribesman approves of.

[Tribesman]

Let those nations foolish enough to move goods through the region contribute to illegitimate Somali growth.

OK , since the Sirius Star was carrying oil to the United States let them contribute for their foolishness
Now I don't know if you heard of this recent development Tuff but it appears some fellow got a shovel and dug a hole just up the coast from where these attacks are happening , they are thinking of calling it the sewers carnal or something , they reckon if you get a bucket and fill the hole with water you might just be able to float a boat in it .
So it appears these boaty people are just in the area to see if this new fangled hole really can float their boats and that is why them pirates are taking the oppertunity to rob the silly sightseers .
It does pose a bit of a problem doesn't it , but there is helpfull advice at hand .
The IMB suggests that if you want to look at this hole in your boat you should try and stay as far from the Somali coast as possible...unfortunately the locals heard about this too so most of the piracy they inflict on the sightseers is off the Yemeni coastline not the Somali one .

[ICantSpellDawg]

OK , since the Sirius Star was carrying oil to the United States let them contribute for their foolishness
Now I don't know if you heard of this recent development Tuff but it appears some fellow got a shovel and dug a hole just up the coast from where these attacks are happening , they are thinking of calling it the sewers carnal or something , they reckon if you get a bucket and fill the hole with water you might just be able to float a boat in it .
So it appears these boaty people are just in the area to see if this new fangled hole really can float their boats and that is why them pirates are taking the oppertunity to rob the silly sightseers .
It does pose a bit of a problem doesn't it , but there is helpfull advice at hand .
The IMB suggests that if you want to look at this hole in your boat you should try and stay as far from the Somali coast as possible...unfortunately the locals heard about this too so most of the piracy they inflict on the sightseers is off the Yemeni coastline not the Somali one .

The Yemeni Coast IS off of the Somali coast. The pirates have a 250 mile reach max (and unlikely beyond sight of shore) at the moment. Captains should obey that border and anywhere else that absolutely needs to be traversed that is closer in should occupy the interest of the fleets.

Link to Map of Attacks/Hijackings

This is a pretty straight forward map. It shows areas where shipping lanes absolutely should not be. These areas are off the coast of Nugaal, Mudug and Puntland primarily - not directly across from Yemen.

[Tribesman]

The Yemeni Coast IS off of the Somali coast.

I suggest you check out the IMB, nearly all this years attacks have been on the Yemeni side of the Gulf. That is because most shipping is staying away from the Somali coast .

The pirates have a 250 mile reach max at the moment.

Errrrrrr...how far out was that ship that was carrying oil to America ? Was it within 250 miles of Somalia or was it perhaps a long long way south east of Kenya

Have a map as your link doesn't have much information at allhttp://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?opt...emap&Itemid=89

[ICantSpellDawg]

I suggest you check out the IMB, nearly all this years attacks have been on the Yemeni side of the Gulf. That is because most shipping is staying away from the Somali coast .

Errrrrrr...how far out was that ship that was carrying oil to America ? Was it within 250 miles of Somalia or was it perhaps a long long way south east of Kenya

Have a map as your link doesn't have much information at allhttp://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?opt...emap&Itemid=89

That map doesnt work. I went to the IMB and I don't understand what the map I posted means in relation.

Maybe that is just where the ships are being held. I'm daft.

[Tribesman]

That map doesnt work.

sorry , it dead links .
from that>home >piracy report>zoom on the Gulf and then you can get locations and details of all this years reported incidents .

But anyway , nice to see the French have started a convoy system isn't it .

[Crazed Rabbit]

Stamping out piracy isn't worth 1000's of civilian deaths.

Who says 1000s of civilians would die? We've got smart bombs and everything.

And if one was an international shipping conglomerate, I am sure there might be ways around the wussy attitude so many ports have about guns, like having other ships to store the guns on legally outside of port while the main ship docks. That idea is the result of a couple minutes of typing, and I'm sure prolonged thought on the matter could yield more ways for powerful corporations to deal with those problems.

However, one method that even control freak sissies couldn't ban* would be steam hoses - like water, but ever so hot and scalding. Get some nice nozzles set up around the ladders, points of boarding, and some mobile ones as well. Get lime too. Should be alright even on oil tankers. Of course, this might not work for wussy countries that fret about pirate's human rights.

Oh, and since tribesy has malfed up the whole linking to a site process again, here's a link that does work.

CR
*Maybe. The sissiness of sissies knows no bounds.

[Tribesman]

Well first a suggestion of guns being the answer now he suggests chemical warfare .
But OK ...what problems do the use of lime as a weapon in any environment let alone a maritime environment pose to the defenders who use it

[JR-]

I have a lot of sympathy for the view expressed here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../19/do1908.xml
that we brought this piracy on ourselves.

[rory_20_uk]

Arming the crew is not desirable unless one wants the Wild Wild West on the High Seas. Using firearms on an oil tanker would be akin to lighting a match in a powder magazine. However non-lethal means are available and have been used to repel some attacks. Fire hoses, bright spot lights, and the ship's klaxon are the most common. Bulkhead doors that can't be opened from the outside for the bridge, engine room, and crew compartments are also cost effective defense mechanisms. There's even electrified fencing. However, a security system and procedures are only as good as the captain & crew's diligence and training in following them. Security procedures, done properly, are inconvenient, which is what makes them effective. Complacency, inadequate training and human error will compromise the best system every time.

Pirates are likely to give the ultimatum: "let us in or we'll sink you"

How many merchant ships can survive RPGs fired at them?

[Hosakawa Tito]

How would fire hoses in anyway reduce gunfire in the direction of the ship? Yes, as an option it would reduce the number of bullets traveling away from the ship, but who cares about those? Pirates would be shooting at the boat aiming at guys controlling hoses instead of guys shooting firearms.

Good sentiment, though - something needs to be done and simply nay saying anyone's ideas isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

(ASIDE - Hosa: what do you think about Giuliani and his possibility of picking up Hillary's or Patterson's seat? There is a discussion going on in the election thread.)

Here's a link describing some of the methods used. Scroll down to the heading, Combating Piracy. The pirates involved in taking these big ships aren't fools, just the opposite. Boarding a huge ship from a small boat is best accomplished by stealth or guile not with guns blazing. Shooting at an oil or lpg tanker is risking suicide by fire and/or explosion, not much profit in that.
The latest seizure demonstrates that these pirate syndicates are adjusting their tactics by expanding their area of operations farther out to sea. Probably because of the increased awareness of pirate activity by crews when closer to shore, and the relaxation of vigilance when farther out.

[Mikeus Caesar]

Pirates are likely to give the ultimatum: "let us in or we'll sink you"

How many merchant ships can survive RPGs fired at them?

Erm...quite a few actually.

My Father was an engineer onboard merchant ships during the 80's, and was paid danger money due to the fact that an oil-tanker he worked on during the Iran-Iraq war was frequently courting danger. He says that his ship's sister-ship got hit by an anti-tank missile, straight to the bridge, among other things.

Basically, large merchant ships can survive a hit from rusty old RPG's. Sure, it leaves an unsightly hole in the side of the hull, but they don't sink, and there's a low probability of it causing damage to essential system. That, and they couldn't hit the side of a barn, nevermind a giant ship, with an innaccurate RPG, from a few hundred metres away.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Here's a link describing some of the methods used. Scroll down to the heading, Combating Piracy. The pirates involved in taking these big ships aren't fools, just the opposite. Boarding a huge ship from a small boat is best accomplished by stealth or guile not with guns blazing. Shooting at an oil or lpg tanker is risking suicide by fire and/or explosion, not much profit in that.
The latest seizure demonstrates that these pirate syndicates are adjusting their tactics by expanding their area of operations farther out to sea. Probably because of the increased awareness of pirate activity by crews when closer to shore, and the relaxation of vigilance when farther out.

How expensive would a centrally located body heat sensor be? Are these ships picked up at night or during the day?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Well first a silly suggestion of guns being the answer now he suggests chemical warfare .
But OK lets humour the creature ...what problems do the use of lime as a weapon in any environment let alone a maritime environment pose to the defenders who use it


have you ever considered thinking before you type ?

Did you consider, prior to posting this one, that the English language contains many ways to indicate you believe someone is wrong without being personally insulting at the same time?

[Husar]

Erm...quite a few actually.

My Father was an engineer onboard merchant ships during the 80's, and was paid danger money due to the fact that an oil-tanker he worked on during the Iran-Iraq war was frequently courting danger. He says that his ship's sister-ship got hit by an anti-tank missile, straight to the bridge, among other things.

Basically, large merchant ships can survive a hit from rusty old RPG's. Sure, it leaves an unsightly hole in the side of the hull, but they don't sink, and there's a low probability of it causing damage to essential system. That, and they couldn't hit the side of a barn, nevermind a giant ship, with an innaccurate RPG, from a few hundred metres away.

Apart from your obvious almost racist comments you're forgetting that they don't just have one single round to fire. Noone even said their weaponry is old and outdated, remember some of them made millions before and can afford more modern weaponry as well as bigger ships for themselves.

IIRC they also have motherships they use to launch operations from etc so it's not just a bunch of Untermenschen in a paddle boat armed with rusty old kitchen knives trying to look for a ladder the crew has conveniently let down for them.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I have a lot of sympathy for the view expressed here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../19/do1908.xml
that we brought this piracy on ourselves.

I think the opinion expressed by that writer is wrong.

Piracy is nearly as old as shipping. Banditry is older only because ships were developed later in history than were feet.

Anywhere where the "powers that be" do not patrol and work to prevent this craft it will flourish. After all, piracy -- from the pirate's perspective -- has always had a great cost-benefit ratio. Greed has always been a component of human nature.

So, what will this author pin on Bush43 once they've run out of current events to characterize? WW2? The Crusades? Stuff and piffle.

[rory_20_uk]

Erm...quite a few actually.

My Father was an engineer onboard merchant ships during the 80's, and was paid danger money due to the fact that an oil-tanker he worked on during the Iran-Iraq war was frequently courting danger. He says that his ship's sister-ship got hit by an anti-tank missile, straight to the bridge, among other things.

Basically, large merchant ships can survive a hit from rusty old RPG's. Sure, it leaves an unsightly hole in the side of the hull, but they don't sink, and there's a low probability of it causing damage to essential system. That, and they couldn't hit the side of a barn, nevermind a giant ship, with an inaccurate RPG, from a few hundred metres away.

A few hundred metres, when the people on board have bright light, electrified rails and a fire hose? You could be 20 metres away or less and be in less danger from the crew that they'd be from you.

I guess it might depend what sort of craft you're on. An oil tanker might not survive the same punishment.

Assuming that you're probably right, then scrap the RPG. What about limpit mines? Pretty basic to make and placed under the water line will make a nasty hole where it counts.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

I like your eaglespeak blog Tuff , especially the muppets repeating the we won in Iraq bull


Most ships do have anti boarding devices , all are supposed to follow a very long and constantly revised list of proceedures to avoid being boarded(or in the case of being boarded to retain control of the vessel for safety of the crew the cargo the ship and other ships) .
Yet you come to armed guards again , all national and international shipping organisations oppose it , all the officers and seamans organisations and unions oppose it , the insurers oppose it , even the lawyers oppose it ...can you think why they all oppose it ?


Another one with no understanding at all

Someone who has touble with the armed guard argument .

See, using non-lethal weapons to defend your ships are nice, but what happen if they don't work? You screwed Tribes. Sure, people will get killed, but you think it be any different if the crew don't have any weapons, + the pirates are violent and their demands are not met? How they to defend themselves? Throw Rocks at the pirates Tribes ?

[LittleGrizzly]

Ill admit i don't know much about RPG's but are the pirates or weapons really that bad that they couldn't hit a super frieghter from a few 100 meters, with the size on the thing the weapon would have to be wildly inaccurate to miss if you aim for the centre of the ship..

[rory_20_uk]

Yeah and I heard about a bank robber who thought the best way to remove the money from a bank was shooting a flame thrower into the safe ....there wasn't much in the way of profit though

Cute.

Using the analogy, possibly if the bank manager and employees were relying on the safe to live they'd open it, especially if the money wasn't theirs. And all the other banks see that if you don't open the safe, they'd die too.

Unless the firehose makes the AK-47 armed pirates scared...

[Tribesman]

Using the analogy, possibly if the bank manager and employees were relying on the safe to live they'd open it, especially if the money wasn't theirs. And all the other banks see that if you don't open the safe, they'd die too.

Perfect Rory , and what are bank mangers and their staff told to do in robberies ?

[rory_20_uk]

Perfect Rory , and what are bank mangers and their staff told to do in robberies ?

Say no way and if required get shot? You can tell them what you want - if you're the 5th in the line and you've seen the other four executed I imagine you'd possibly show more loyalty to your family than the chief exec.

There is a difference between a bank in the UK and International waters off an inherently lawless country.

[Ronin]

Perfect Rory , and what are bank mangers and their staff told to do in robberies ?

I believe general rules used by banks say you should stay calm, cooperate with the robers requests and if is possible to trigger the silent alarm without the robbers becoming aware you should do so.

I´m pretty sure they are not told to wrestle the robbers into submission

[Tribesman]

There is a difference between a bank in the UK and International waters off an inherently lawless country.

Is there ?
In both the criminals want to get the goods causing minimum damage . In this case the people on the boats are also classed as goods .

[rory_20_uk]

I'll for the time being assume you're not being willfully moronic.

The Criminals have the same goals.
There are police in the UK, there aren't in International waters.

See???

Are we trying to square the circle of the bank and the crew on the high seas being a good analogy?

[yesdachi]

Well first a suggestion of guns being the answer now he suggests chemical warfare .
But OK ...what problems do the use of lime as a weapon in any environment let alone a maritime environment pose to the defenders who use it

Is scurvy a chemical weapon?