The NAvy WERE THERE at kidnap of Lynn Rival

[Kukri]

I'm 57, I've spent a career in merchant shipping, including dealing with Iranian gunboats 25 years back and Somali pirates much more recently and if you read over the thread you will see that I have probably supplied more facts to this thread than anyone else.

 

[Clarky]

There's some gloriously silly stuff in this thread, from the Dirty Harry school of armchair naval tacticians, all of which seems to boil down to "the end justifies the means".

Here's one example:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minn
""4 - Helo continues over to mother ship and rakes bridge with m/g fire".

The "mother ship" in this case was a large Singapore owned container ship;"

reply : "The ship might have once been owned in Singapore but the time in question it was a commandeered enemy combatant vessel supporting an act of violence against a British vessel in international waters. The owners would have to pursue damages through the Somali legal system.

As to the cost of a tow, I say put the container ship on eBay as a RN prize of war."
unquote

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minn
"the pirates M.O. is to assemble the entire crew on the bridge; this is well known to those who actually have to deal withy these situations, which certainly includes the commanding officer of the RFA "Wave Ruler" "

reply "That is handy, now the captain of Wave Rider is free to direct fire from his 30mm cannon into other parts of the ship to disable vital systems."
unquote.

So, a large ship flying the flag of a friendly Commonwealth country (Singapore - the Kota Wajar is owned and flagged there) which herself is the victim of a pirate attack, with her crew of 18 or so held hostage, is to be shot up by the Royal Navy just because two British yachtsmen have been kidnapped.

There's a word for attacking innocent merchant ships - it's called piracy.

But of course its consistent with Catastrophe's wish to "apply maximum force".

Curiously for someone whom one takes, from his strictures on what the Navy should do, to be a British subject, he uses American slang:

quote

if the military kicks butt the bad boys will eventually realise it is not worth the risk and the loss of an innocent life or two now, will save many in the future

unquote

"kicks butt" ?? "bad boys" ??

Too many Rambo videos and not enough fresh air and exercise.

Amongst the ships detained off Somalia at the moment are two from nations not known for the "fluffiness" of their military or their sensitivity to human rights - a North Korean tanker and a Chinese bulk carrier. The PLA Navy have, and had, units in the immediate vicinity of the Chinese ship but they have not tried to "take out" the pirates.

It is not that simple.

Dear Minn,
You have just added some more total rubbish to the thread.Clearly its not piracy to attempt to rescue hostages from a terrorist controlled seized ship.

I agree its not that simple to rescue the hostages,and I wouldnt advocate a shootout as a first option from my experience,but it would have been fairly straight forward to prevent the skiff returning to the mothership- which once it does that effectively ruled out any rescue attempt.Also its not clear that the pirates and Chandlers were on the Yacht at first if so then the skiff should have been sunk or disabled ,as it would have been fairly easy to contain the yacht till help came in 2 hours. A frigate was only 2 hours away so if the skiff was prevented from returning to the mothership for those 2 hours then I am sure the Chandlers would be in a much better position than they are in now.
There is also the question of the example and encouragement to keep taking hostages as obviously the pirates think now Brits are just going to watch.
My own view is that whoever was in charge has avoided making a decision,then clearly there has been an attempt to cover this error which has quite rightly been exposed by angry crew members from the Navy ship.Clearly the crew of the RN ship are angry and I dont see why so many forumites are " on the Navy wouldnt do anything wrong track" ,as clearly if all was well there would no cover up.
I would imagine there has been some political interference in the Wavefronts Captains decision making,and whoever made the decision to do nothing should explain why.The silence suggests to me there was a huge error made.

 

[jonjo]

Originally Posted by Minn

Using your logic if the Argentinians wish to invade the Falklands again all they have to do is approach the islands by sea in stolen merchant vessels and the Royal Navy steam around in impotent circles of legal confusion.

reply "That is handy, now the captain of Wave Rider is free to direct fire from his 30mm cannon into other parts of the ship to disable vital systems."
unquote.

So, a large ship flying the flag of a friendly Commonwealth country (Singapore - the Kota Wajar is owned and flagged there) which herself is the victim of a pirate attack, with her crew of 18 or so held hostage, is to be shot up by the Royal Navy just because two British yachtsmen have been kidnapped.

Silly boy. I am not suggesting wanton vandalism of the ship, I said disable vital systems safe in the knowledge that the hostages are clustered on the bridge. The intent being to detain the merchant ship offshore until the RN warship arrived on scene.

You seem happy for the status quo to continue. We are witnessing a geographic expansion of piracy and associated revenue for the pirates. The word is spreading about the easy money, soon the whole coast of Africa will be hostile.

If this continues for another 5 years the pirates will be rich enough to submit a bid for the spare 4th Trident sub.

 

[jonjo]

So, a large ship flying the flag of a friendly Commonwealth country (Singapore - the Kota Wajar is owned and flagged there)

Which equates to pursuing an act of war at sea under the disguise of a neutral flag. Just another reason to attack or arrest the pirates.

 

[Searush]

I have generally avoided the discussion of tactics here as a confirmed coward & pacifist, however, from a pure boat management perspective the following is confusing me;

"prevent the skiff returning to the mother ship"


On the face of it a sensible concept, but please explain to me how a larg-ish merchant ship (the RFA tanker) is able to impede a very fast & highly manouverable small boat? The skiff can impede the tanker (Greepeace do this sort of thing all the time) but the tanker is far too slow & ponderous to do anything that the skiff couldn't simply drive round.

if it has one ready for sea, the tanker could put a fast rib in the water to chase & harry the skiff, but a firefight is almost certain to follow - not that that necessarily eliminates the option.

 

[Clarky]

Dear Jonjo,
I agree with you but would say that the main issue is was there Whitehall interference in the Captains decision making,thus preventing any form intervention and causing national embarrassment.

 

[xxyyzz]

...please explain to me how a larg-ish merchant ship (the RFA tanker) is able to impede a very fast & highly manouverable small boat?

I think the expectation is that the helicopter with the missiles and machine guns would be able to persuade them?

 

[jonjo]

@Minn

I am surprised a time served merchant navy man has such a relaxed liberal view of piracy. The world has not witnessed such widespread interception of international maritime trade since the British Empire and Royal Navy committed itself to the principal of free global trade in the 1820's. (World Wars excepted)

180 years of world order is being reversed and you have no solution other than writing ransom cheques.

 

[jonjo]

Dear Jonjo,
I agree with you but would say that the main issue is was there Whitehall interference in the Captains decision making,thus preventing any form intervention and causing national embarrassment.

Baffoons always gravitate towards centers of power, that will never change. I blame the captain of Wave Rider for not putting his telescope to his blind eye.

 

[Kukri]

@Jonjo:

I don't have a relaxed view of piracy.

The last "traditional" Chinese pirate attack happened in the year I was born. Piracy re-started with the withdrawal of the RN from "East of Suez" by Harold Wilson. The RN were running anti-piracy patrols off the Somali coast and around Indonesia until then.

The most brutal pirate attacks I have had anything to do with were carried out by Thai fishermen on Vietnamese refugee boats - which of course contained the refugees' savings in gold, as the Thais knew. Sweet natured nonviolent Buddhists with a relaxed view of sex - I think NOT - murdering *******s who would rape the women then cut their throats and leave a boat full of bodies floating around the South China Sea. That never made the news, but hundreds, maybe thousands, were killed.

The world had a very relaxed view of it during the Iran/Iraq war; it wasn't news then because it was Iranian Revolutionary Guards firing missiles at innocent merchant ships - and very often sinking them. I lost some colleagues. That was stopped PDQ by the RN - we used to secure first place in the convoy by offering the warship CO lunch - the frigate being closed up at action stations and on sandwiches...they used to say they could not hear the rust crunching on our decks unlike some others. It took the Iranians about two days to decide not to mess with the RN.

Three colleagues on three different ships were attacked by Indonesian pirates in the early 90's - again not news - that stopped with the Indonesian revolution because the pirates were Indonesian Navy "moonlighting". Very expert, that bunch.

Nastiest attack on a ship that I know of was by a Chinese gang off the coast of China in 1992 - killed the whole crew and dumped the bodies over the side - the Gong An caught the gang when they became suspiciously wealthy and one one confessed - all shot. End of problem.

And now the Somalis, who have a different M.O. They are kidnappers for ransom rather than going for the ship or the cargo.

Whole list of problems because no Government is willing to land forces in Somalia, you can't distinguish between a pirate "mother ship" (a captured fishing boat) and a regular fishing boat except by boarding it, there is nowhere to try captured pirates, etc. etc.

By the way, an RPG does not have much effect on a tanker - some bounced off the VLCC "BW Lion" the day before yesterday - she escaped the attack. Al Qaeda tried a suicide motorboat attack on a French VLCC - small hole in one tank, small fire, no big deal.

Constructive suggestions very welcome...

 

[David_Jersey]

Baffoons always gravitate towards centers of power, that will never change. I blame the captain of Wave Rider for not putting his telescope to his blind eye.

I think you will find that the folks who would have done that will be screened out and not let anywhere near a command in the modern Navy.


I rather suspect that in future years the Obits column in the Times will include references to a Navy Officer's outstanding scores during Health & Safety inspections, rather than tales such as disabling a U-Boat by stuffing an orange down the periscope during a drunken row accross the channel........for a bet

 

[FullCircle]

"prevent the skiff returning to the mother ship"


On the face of it a sensible concept, but please explain to me how a larg-ish merchant ship (the RFA tanker) is able to impede a very fast & highly manouverable small boat? .

Well, it is all about denial.
You deny the pirates access to the Mothership, if possible. This plays for time, while the HMS Cumberland steams toward you.
If you fail to prevent the skiff from accessing the Mothership, then you are back to equal turf, in that the Mothership is no more or less manoeverable than the RFA ship. Now try and dent the Mothership from reaching its destiination or port, thus keeping it at sea ad infinitum. Not a tolerable situation for the pirates, they need to go home for tea sometimes too, if only to write the ransom note.

If this strategy is successful, HMS Cumberland would have caught up by now, and then it is at least 2:1
Bear in mind the Pirates are only armed with what they carried aboard in the first place.
Then a protracted game of denial ensues until one party gets fed up.

Of course, what we forget here is that the real Mothership is no longer around, as the Singaporean ship is itself a captured asset.
What then needs to happen is to identify that real mothership and ggo play denial with them too.

Reading between the lines, the mothership casts off skiffs full of people with piratical intent and then abandons them to their fate, which sharpens the resolve of the putative pirates to actually capture something, which is how the Lynn Rival was targetted anyway. The pirates just weren't able to find another target of opportunity before their own ship stores ran out.
Tactically, it is a winner to actually capture these vessels, or get them to release hostages.
Strategically, it is far more effective to deny the root of the problem, which is
a) the motherships
b) the bases from which they operate
c) their financial oxygen
d) the political stability of the region

I struggle to see much evidence of the very important b), c) or d) happening, so we can never win until all of the root causes are choked off.


Stable doors, Locks, Horses and Horizons in this case, but we have to do the best we can in this limited instance.

 

[Kukri]

Of course, what we forget here is that the real Mothership is no longer around, as the Singaporean ship is itself a captured asset.
What then needs to happen is to identify that real mothership and ggo play denial with them too.

Reading between the lines, the mothership casts off skiffs full of people with piratical intent and then abandons them to their fate, which sharpens the resolve of the putative pirates to actually capture something, which is how the Lynn Rival was targetted anyway. The pirates just weren't able to find another target of opportunity before their own ship stores ran out.
Tactically, it is a winner to actually capture these vessels, or get them to release hostages.
Strategically, it is far more effective to deny the root of the problem, which is
a) the motherships
b) the bases from which they operate
c) their financial oxygen
d) the political stability of the region

I struggle to see much evidence of the very important b), c) or d) happening, so we can never win until all of the root causes are choked off.


Stable doors, Locks, Horses and Horizons in this case, but we have to do the best we can in this limited instance.

(a) is happening. Its what the Wave Knight was doing (and has done in the past) - here's the latest one:

"On Thursday 12 November, the EU NAVFOR French warship Floreal tracked down and apprehended the pirate attack group responsible for the recently reported attacks 500 miles north west of the Seychelles.

"After previous attacks were reported on 10 and 11 November, and in particular the attempted hijacking of the BW Lion, the French warship Floreal was tasked to sanitize the area of the attacks. A EU NAVFOR Maritime Patrol aircraft from the Seychelles found the pirate attack group and guided the Floreal onto their position. The Floreal found the pirate mother ship and two attack skiffs some 500 miles north west of the Seychelles and 650 miles east of Hobyo, a pirate stronghold on the coast of Somalia.

"The pirates tried to dispose of weapons, ladders and other pirate paraphernalia but the Floreal was able to seize weapons, grappling hooks and other equipment that left the ship in no doubt as to their intentions to carry out pirate attacks. French ship Floreal has taken the suspected pirates into custody."

(b(, (c) and (d) are the root of the problem.

IMHO Somalia was a UN adminstered territory (adminstered by Italy) until independence in 1960 and a return of UN control would be one solution.

Oh as I pointed put above HMS Cumberland only has to flash up her big gas turbines to catch up a merchant ship - no need to "wait until she arrives"

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Not sure about the point of your post above. Wave Ruler seemed to be there for not much more than observation, which was then wrongly reported by the MOD who initially never mentioned they could see the Chandlers, so we already have some economy with the truth.

You rightly point out the the past admirable anti pirate actions by the Royal Navy and indeed the current robust actions taken by the French Navy. But nothing you say offers any mitigation for the inaction taken by the Royal Navy (It is not the first time this year they have just stood by) and the RFA, many sailors who are ex or serving reservists, not to forget the service personnel also on board.

Seniority is no excuse and I recall a visiting General to Bosnia, accompanied only by his driver, chewing out a Serb warlord in no uncertain terms and then standing his ground until the man and his motley crew withdrew. It is said that small action by an unarmed man saved the lives of a score of Muslim Bosnians., using only his presence and air of authority.

 

[jonjo]

I think you will find that the folks who would have done that will be screened out and not let anywhere near a command in the modern Navy.

Sadly true I suspect.

The problem is the RN spent 30 years rehearsing for a computerized over the horizon missile conflict with the Soviets and as a result the whole show is now run by the original joystick x-box generation.

 

[maxi77]

I think the expectation is that the helicopter with the missiles and machine guns would be able to persuade them?

Mind you she was not carrying the helicopter with that type of role in mind, it was most likely one constructed for Anti Submarine activity. Equally they may well not have had the missiles you suggest they use, not the machine guns (the ship was not there as an enforcer but as a mobile petrol station so that the enforcers could spend longer at sea). I supect also the few RN personaell would not have been trained in dealing with hostage situations and the most likely results of their intervention would have been two dead hostages and several RPGs through both the helicopter and the RFA. Not a very satisfactory outcome.

To deal with this menace we need to accept at least on from the following, that some hostages will be killed and ships damaged, possibly sunk, or that we deny the pirtates the land bases they currently use, or we simply remove all targets from their area of operations.

 

[FullCircle]

several RPGs through both the helicopter and the RFA. Not a very satisfactory outcome.

[\QUOTE]

Quote on Wikipedia (not far from the truth this one)

the grenade protrudes from the launch tubes. It is 40-105 millimeters in diameter and weighs between 2.5 and 4.5 kilograms. It is launched by a gunpowder booster charge, giving it an initial speed of 115 meters per second, and creating a cloud of light grey-blue smoke. The rocket motor ignites after 10 meters and sustains flight out to 500 meters at a maximum velocity of 295 meters per second. The grenade is stabilized by two sets of fins that deploy in-flight: one large set on the stabilizer pipe to maintain direction and a smaller front set to induce rotation. The grenade can fly up to 1,100 meters; the fuze sets the maximum range, usually 920 meters.


So, its max range is about 1000m,assuming a skilled operator, who can calculate a bit of azimuth on a rolling ship, which is far less than a heavy machine gun on a fixed mount in Sustained Fire role.
Also, it should be noted that an RPG has rarely brought anything out of the sky, as that is not its primary role. It is a Rocket Propelled Grenade, whereas you may be thinking of a SAM7, which ain't much better.

 

[Saguday]

I think this affair is about to reach a conclusion

 

[maxi77]

several RPGs through both the helicopter and the RFA. Not a very satisfactory outcome.

[\QUOTE]

Quote on Wikipedia (not far from the truth this one)

the grenade protrudes from the launch tubes. It is 40-105 millimeters in diameter and weighs between 2.5 and 4.5 kilograms. It is launched by a gunpowder booster charge, giving it an initial speed of 115 meters per second, and creating a cloud of light grey-blue smoke. The rocket motor ignites after 10 meters and sustains flight out to 500 meters at a maximum velocity of 295 meters per second. The grenade is stabilized by two sets of fins that deploy in-flight: one large set on the stabilizer pipe to maintain direction and a smaller front set to induce rotation. The grenade can fly up to 1,100 meters; the fuze sets the maximum range, usually 920 meters.


So, its max range is about 1000m,assuming a skilled operator, who can calculate a bit of azimuth on a rolling ship, which is far less than a heavy machine gun on a fixed mount in Sustained Fire role.
Also, it should be noted that an RPG has rarely brought anything out of the sky, as that is not its primary role. It is a Rocket Propelled Grenade, whereas you may be thinking of a SAM7, which ain't much better.

Interestingly considerable accuracy can be obtained from an RPG as I understand it and I would suspect that accurate fire from a machine gun of less than 12.7mm would not exceed the RPG range. The real problem is that until the hostages are accounted from long range machine gun fire is not practical, perhaps long range sniper fire might be but not an area weapon such as a machine gun. The problen still remains is that you have a unit which is not apparently equiped or trained at hostage recovery against a buch of guys who have little respect for life in general.

Until we decide (and perhaps that may be a step too far) that pirate killing is more important than hostage recover they will always have the upper hand until we can bring to bear specialist operators who will be able to recover the advantage.

 

[FullCircle]

Interestingly considerable accuracy can be obtained from an RPG as I understand it and I would suspect that accurate fire from a machine gun of less than 12.7mm would not exceed the RPG range. The real problem is that until the hostages are accounted from long range machine gun fire is not practical, perhaps long range sniper fire might be but not an area weapon such as a machine gun. The problen still remains is that you have a unit which is not apparently equiped or trained at hostage recovery against a buch of guys who have little respect for life in general.

Until we decide (and perhaps that may be a step too far) that pirate killing is more important than hostage recover they will always have the upper hand until we can bring to bear specialist operators who will be able to recover the advantage.

Well I've fired one and I can tell you its a bit hit and miss, and I think they are carrying bipod machine guns which would be Ok out to 600m or so, but we digress.

These pirates do have respect for their own lives and those of their hostages, it is all they have got. I will say again, if they lose their hostages, they are jiggered. That leaves them with a few thousand tonnes of freighter to seek a ransom on. If you keep them at sea for long enough they must give up eventually, or scuttle the ship, which leads to their own goal demise.