Piracy - Reality vs Perception

[smurphny]

Originally Posted by Pblais

Not really. It's never about right and wrong. It might be about a chance for justice. A chance for justice is all there ever is or will be in our times.

This sounds like the prevalent ethical relativism which has lead to the bar being lowered to the point of accepting this kind of behavior as somehow "normal" for "our times." Some of us have a more absolutist view of the human condition and right and wrong which are not based on the latest whims of society.
As far as the definition of piracy goes, it's always been about organized crime, more often than not organized by governments! The only way to combat it has historically been to take away the bases of operations. These guys will always find a way to get on the water if they have shelter from which to operate. We need to start mining harbors and destroying shore facilities.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by genomic

LOL, true. But then the plan is to upgrade and see the world and like many here I've considered my options with regards to this issue. I'd rather be informed before I go though. Sailing around the Cape, as someone mentioned, seems to contain it's own risks which may or may not be greater than taking the vastly quicker route through the Gulf.

I sure don`t see any risks going around the cape that come close to those going up the red sea. I`d sooner circumnavigate the southern ocean than head up the Red Sea. At least those risks I can prepare for and mitigate through good seamanship and equipment.

[genomic]

Originally Posted by cwyckham

I sure don`t see any risks going around the cape that come close to those going up the red sea. I`d sooner circumnavigate the southern ocean than head up the Red Sea. At least those risks I can prepare for and mitigate through good seamanship and equipment.

By that I mean (if you sailed around the African coast that is) you would be traversing some rather politically and socially unstable areas. There may not be as much piracy, but you may be at greater risk of being attacked on land, on your way to the local market or what have you.

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by genomic

By that I mean (if you sailed around the African coast that is) you would be traversing some rather politically and socially unstable areas. There may not be as much piracy, but you may be at greater risk of being attacked on land, on your way to the local market or what have you.

Ahh. I see. I think the prevailing winds and currents would probably make it best to basically make your only african stop in south africa. After that you do something like St. Helena - Ascension - Brazil - Caribbean. Then you cross back over to Europe of you want to get there. I'm sure there are those who would have actual experience to share, but I think it's pretty uncommon to harbour hop on the african coast.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by genomic

By that I mean (if you sailed around the African coast that is) you would be traversing some rather politically and socially unstable areas. There may not be as much piracy, but you may be at greater risk of being attacked on land, on your way to the local market or what have you.

I think that applies to just about any harbour in the world... even my home port Poole.. thats the UK by the way...
As for harbour hopping the African Coast.... Africans do it quite often...

[sarafina]

interesting reading on this topic here;

Neptune Maritime Security - Home

[captain58sailin]

There are some very nice ports in Gabon, Ghana, Equatorial Guinea, Cameroon. For the nonce I would avoid Nigeria, and Ivory Coast.

[bbl]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Was that 4 fatalities or hijackings of 4 boats?
Was the 200 people or boats?
Where did Cornell get his numbers?
Where'd the boat count come from?

He was referencing the Piracy Watch site (ICC), and probably has extensive knowledge through the noonsite as well. It was 4 boats sucsessfully attacked out of 200 boats crossing. I can't remember if there were any deaths, don't think so.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by smurphny

This sounds like the prevalent ethical relativism which has lead to the bar being lowered to the point of accepting this kind of behavior as somehow "normal" for "our times." Some of us have a more absolutist view of the human condition and right and wrong which are not based on the latest whims of society.

My sense of right & wrong is based upon what works and what doesn't. and adapts according to prevailing local conditions. But I am a pragmatist.

The powerful have always preyed on the weak. always have and always will. In the "civilised" world we have laws to allow that to happen using only money. In the other places it's a bit more basic and money alone doesn't buy you power / safety / being right .......for some, being down the food chain can come as a surprise.

[IdoraKeeper]

Just to add a few facts that some may not be aware of. There are now under development several different types of medium altitude drone aircraft that are designed for long duration surveilance. These will be combined with autonomous rotorcraft launched from warships to create a digital net of surveilance that will be able to detect even small craft at sea in the area. In testing and actually installed on several warships of the US Navy we now have prototypes of MegaWatt lasers mounted on close in defense mounts which are digitally linked to new pointing systems which will allow engagement of multiple targets out to a range of several kilometers. These systems Will be effective and will be employed in the not too distant future.

There will not be a safe place to be a Pirate, they will be interdicted efficiently and they are not going to be able to persist in their activities. They will be disabled and captured or killed outright depending on the circumstances. The cavalry is on the way but we are a couple years away from implimentation. Until then things will likely get worse. The pirates will try to cash in as long as they can.

Todd

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

And as more cruisers avoid the place, the statistical risk for those transiting gets higher.

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

The more defended the ships are the more difficult they are to capture and the easier yachts are!

We saw NO ships that were undefended. Most had bars over all lower deck areas enclosing mooring hawser pipes, windows etc. Many had barbed wire entanglements etc.

So yachts are now soft targets.

Further its not difficult for spies to trace yachts leaving Oman as all yachts must report on VHF 16 when the leave Salalah and what their destination is!!!!
Plus the number of skiffs that pass each day that may be reporting positions/strengths etc.

Originally Posted by Adelie

Where'd the boat count come from?

Its not difficult to make a pretty clear estimate as the window to go up the Gulf is very short because of the 2 hurricane seasons per year in the North Indian Ocean/Arabian Sea.
Also everyone stops in just one port, Salalah in Oman.

in 2010 there were 2 convoys of reasonable size, ours of 26 boats, one a few weeks later about the same size and the rest went in groups of 2 or 3. The small groups were very few. In the 4 weeks we were in Salalah only 3 boats left not in a convoy.

So my figures 2 x 25 boat convoys = 50 yachts + say 10 groups of 2-3 boats, say 30 = 80 + 20 boats not accounted for = 100 yachts.

That must have halved this year. Fewer people didn't understand the situation. Blue water rally had 11 boats; there were 15 in Maldives heading that way that went in that convoy by the Dutch guy; and I suppose some individuals = aprox 50 boats.


By the way, re stats of piracy attacks: Live Piracy Map
We heard 2 confirmed attacks on the VHF 30 and 50 miles from us, and the attack we witnessed, well none of those 3 attacks were reported on websites. So whatever you read you can add a few extras!

Photo below: 37 yachts in Salalah, Oman before our convoy of 26 boats left. That leaves 11 yachts who were mostly waiting for the next convoy. Maybe there were one or 2 groups of 2 or 3 boats heading out by themselves.

[smurphny]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

My sense of right & wrong is based upon what works and what doesn't. and adapts according to prevailing local conditions. But I am a pragmatist.

Not surprising. That IS the prevailing "philosophy": Grab what you can get and to hell with everyone else. Sad.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by smurphny

Not surprising. That IS the prevailing "philosophy": Grab what you can get and to hell with everyone else. Sad.

A philosophy thats existed since the 'Dawn of Time'.... its nothing new...
Its just got more sophisticated in the West...

[smurphny]

Originally Posted by boatman61

A philosophy thats existed since the 'Dawn of Time'.... its nothing new...
Its just got more sophisticated in the West...

"Sophisticated" (derivation:Sophist:Gk) of course meaning "devious".

[capn_billl]

Originally Posted by Adelie

Other than the russian roulette where did you get your statistics?

From the internet of course, ....so you know they got to be right.
Actually I stand corrected on the gulf of aden stats, : 1/25 is more accurate with 4 deaths.

I also stand corrected on the cumulative risks of repeated exposure, been a long time since I took stats.

The worldwide is actual reported counts of piracy with kidnapping, or deadly force divided by (my estimate) of people actually leaving the dock, impossible to quantify accurately because out of millions of boats sold divided by times per year people actually go somewhere, and add those who are already "there" and aren't leaving.

Lightening stats from official weather sites, ....and personal experience.

On the net there are many time more reports of lightening strikes than piracy worldwide.

We buy lottery tickets with the odds of winning only 1 in 500,000,000. And expect we will win someday, but overlook clearly risky behaviors that are much more probable to result in death. I personaly use the "lightening test", if it's more probable than being struck by lightening, I don't do it; if it's less probable, then I don't worry about it. (knock on wood)