Piracy on the Somali Coast

[markpierce]

Originally Posted by David M

It's pretty pointless to rattle off methods for eliminating pirates when the will to eradicate them or their boats does not exist.

Amen.

[boatman61]

Face it folks.. piracy is a fact of life... anywhere life is crap someones gonna be there trying to get up the ladder... the end justifies the means..
Piracy on the High Sea's is just one of them,,, you can talk about blowing em away... Dream on boys...Dream on

[ozskipper]

Quote
But if we stop the weapons, we also stop the piracy. As a cruiser out on the sharp & pointy end in the Indian Ocean, this is the main issue for me.

end Quote

But that not going to happen, the Cold War made sure there were plenty of AK47's and M16s for everyone. Getting the guns out of Africa would be as impossible as getting the guns out of the USA. Sadly for everyone, its just not going to happen.

Cheers
Oz

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Firstly it is the mark of civilised societies that we deal with crime in a controlled and legal way ... Somalis are people too and we afford then all the rights and privileges irrespective that a small group are doing great harm. This includes the assumption of innocence, the right to trial ,etc... Perhaps you might read and learn about the causes, what's feeding the problem etc rather then the "send in the marines" nonsense. Dave

You may be confusing me with someone else. I agree that the root causes of Somalia's problems are NOT piracy. And those problems need to be addressed. Probably with aid $$ - it's the American way But I don't think that's what this thread is about.

I think the issue of Piracy & Kidnapping is important enough that it needs attention as well. Right now, there's no dis-incentive for these people. We (the civilized countries) need to provide that dis-incentive in real terms, to let the Somalis know that piracy is not acceptable behavior & will not be tolerated. We haven't been very effective at that up to now.

Taking weapons off boats as they leave Somalia isn't violating anyone's rights, AFAIK. If Somalia can't police it's own people, I don't have a problem with the rest of the world doing it to those boats that leave their waters. And it's better if the military does it, rather than arming folks on freighters. But until the (world) military does something concrete, the shipping companies have NO OPTION except to pay the ransoms. I don't think it's something that the private sector can solve.

What the military has been doing up to now has been ineffectual - it doesn't provide a dis-incentive & it doesn't protect those of us sailing those waters. It's easy to criticize. But it's much better to come up with alternatives & potential solutions. Blockade may be a bit expensive, but it's reasonably humane - certainly more so than kidnapping. And as you pointed out, the Coast Guard already does that all over the world, as part of its War on Drugs (legally, though some might object).

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by ozskipper

The Cold War made sure there were plenty of AK47's and M16s for everyone. Getting the guns out of Africa would be as impossible as getting the guns out of the USA. Sadly for everyone, its just not going to happen. Oz

Oz, I agree that Africa's swimming in weapons. $50 will by an AK47 & lots of ammo in Mozambique. That's why taking the guns away from the pirates & then letting them go is so silly. The pirates certainly don't care about losing a few weapons.

But I DO think we can prevent those weapons from leaving the Somali coast in a fishing/pirate boat. Somalia's a poor country. There aren't that many boats over 50'. I'd think that stopping & searching any boats over, say, 50' that are trying to go further than 50(?) miles offshore of Somalia wouldn't be too hard. OK, I'm an optimist, but I think it's worth a try. It would also provide a line that the pirates would have to cross when coming back with a boat.

Have you got a better solution?

[wannago]

I believe it was the Indian Navy that showed up to help a couple years ago, and apparently figured they'd teach all the rest how it's done, or something, and promptly reported an attack an sinking of a pirate mother ship. Unfortunately, as the story was investigated, turned out they attacked a Thai fishing boat, full of Thai fishermen that were out fishing.

I've read several other reports in the Associated Press, mostly after the first Maersk Alabama incident, were the crew successfully locked themselves in a safe room where they could (and did) disable the vessel and radio for help.

In one very well reported incident the decision to send a Marine boarding was immediate and without hesitation under that condition. Once boarding the vessel, the pirates on board immediately surrendered, and the largest challenge the boarding party faced was convincing the crew that they really were US Marines and would they please open the safe room and come out...

I think that pretty much spells out the solutions that the commercial shipping companies should be considering, rather than attempting to arm their ships.

[Jon Hacking]

Maybe so, & I agree about shipping companies arming their ships. But it's not much of a solution for us small guys. Big ships have thick steel skins & big engines & high topsides & big fire-hoses & lots of other resources that cruisers don't. And crawling into a safe-room won't stop the pirates from trying.

[GavinC]

Originally Posted by David M

I agree with the OP, we do not lack the technology, we lack the will to eliminate the problem.


It's pretty pointless to rattle off methods for eliminating pirates when the will to eradicate them or their boats does not exist.


This is pretty much the "punchline" of the post.


What the OP was describing is a Vulcan Phalanx cannon and its only purpose is for stopping very close incoming missiles.

Perhaps a little too much focus on the surface-to-surface CIWS equivalent aspect and not the concept.

37M assault boats from Wright Int'l., outfit them with a slightly modified version of CIWS or it's equivalent that could be utilized in a surface to surface role

The assault boat in question comes equipped with a formidable armament from the manufacturer to include:
-1 40mm mounted cannon

-1 20mm mounted machine gun

-2 stacked twin SSM lanchers

-1 SAM launcher


The idea was to modify the hull and substitute a system similar to the CIWS designed for a surface-to-surface role in lieu of the SAM launcher to meet parameters of specific mission requirements. Some of the more detailed aspects of vessel design that were not relevant to the public post (but submitted to associates)were omitted and merely the mission concept itself was the primary topic.

Dave, please forgive me because although I try to understand where you are coming from on this concept of humanitarian efforts, self-help, aid efforts, sending in a few missionaries, aid workers and diplomats, etc.... This has been ongoing and none of it has worked. Quite frankly a whole bunch of "Daves" currently treat them humanely upon their arrest, give them a nice cot, feed them, see to their medical needs and insure their safety back to shore is to imply that there is no risk, all reward and you perpetuate the situation. They are back at it within a week and know that there are no repercussions for their actions.

If you were in that awkward position of having to repel boarders with charged firehoses while taking small arms fire you might think a little differently. An astute 3rd Mate saw the approach and action was taken in time with regard to maneuvering and charging firehoses. Their skiffs sit quite low in the water and they are often unnoticed on radar besides doing their approach in the prop wash and sea clutter on the screen. Once they are onboard, there is nothing more to do and you are at their mercy. The saving grace is that they do not specifically target cruising sailboats to any great extent.

The link pointed out showing geographical and incidents statistics? Off... way off. This is because many incidents go unreported due to the "dollars and cents" factor. Higher frequency of incidents adds up to skyrocketing insurance premiums, so a delicate balance is made between insurance premiums vs. loss of vessel, cargo and lives of crew members based on achieving the bottom line of "dollars and cents".

[wannago]

Originally Posted by Jon Hacking

Maybe so, & I agree about shipping companies arming their ships. But it's not much of a solution for us small guys. Big ships have thick steel skins & big engines & high topsides & big fire-hoses & lots of other resources that cruisers don't. And crawling into a safe-room won't stop the pirates from trying.

The big topsides, fire hoses, etc. don't seem to be much of a deterrent, the pirates are proving to overcome those obstacles repeatedly. One story that did make the news where they successfully used the engines and fire hoses was a cruise ship that did have a group of Sherpas on board for just the occasion.

The safe room is probably only going to work along with some help from international naval patrols. It's a big Ocean, and they can't be everywhere all the time, but if you can buy them an hour or two, they do have helicopters.

I'm not actually suggesting it to anyone, and wouldn't try it myself, but I imagine it is possible to get some overweight 50 foot steel boat someone built with running into containers and reefs in mind, and weld in some bulkheads and a wall to totally enclose the head to double as a safe room, or something like that. As silly an idea as it might be it's infinitely more practical that attempting to mount a close in weapons system on the spreaders.

[Aussiesuede]

Well as long as we're talking about silly and unworkable solutions to a problem, ill toss my silly solution into the mix.

Most of these "pirates" are young lads with far too much time on their hands. No matter where you go on the planet, that's an equation that always ends up with only one singular result - no good. Realising some basic realities at play, one can come up with solutions to dry up the supply of bored young me with too much time on their hands. The warlords obviously realised that there was an endless supply of these lads at hand and they created an attractant for them. They give them free drugs to keep them amped up, then send them out on their "pirating" ventures and give them a paltry sum of the proceeds. It would be smarter to start playing their game and simply beating them at it. Without a ready supply of young, bored, directionless recruits to exploit, they'd have great difficulty in fashioning their little pirating regattas.

So what is it that attracts 16-23 year old men the world over? That's right - punani. Set up protected red light districts 200 miles inland from any coasts. Completely surround them with UN troops and hardware. Monitor everyone that comes in and allow no guns to enter. Then advertise the hell out of the fact that all the whorehouses and bars are completely free. A young lad sitting in his squathouse in Eyl or Mogodishu bored out of his mind hears the honk of the 4 tmes hourly - bus to a red light district. What's he going to do? Jump up and run to that bus to free unlimited party & punani? Or take a trek down to the shore in hopes of getting on a pirate crew that will net him a few measley bucks that wouldn't be near enough to purchase some of the local for hire whores, and potentially getting shot at by some trigger happy soldier who is all too eager to notch a kill while he's doing "gods work"? I'm betting they could run those buses to the free red light district a minute apart and they'd still all be packed full of young men chasing the strongest attractant on earth. Heck, word of these districts got out, and young fellas from London to Chicago, to Sydney would be flocking to the Somali desert. (Charge those outsiders a fee for access and that forsaken country would have a much needed new revenue stream)

So as enticing as killing everyone in sight may seem, wouldn't it just be easier to give the young lads a place to play? At worse, it would at least be an untried solution as opposed to the "shoot em up" solution which we already KNOW NEVER WORKS. Seriously, when was the last time this "arm everyone and get em shooting at each other" worked?

Well that's my silly can't work solution. But since it doesn't involve shooting anyone, or blowing something up, it won't likely gain much traction. Now back to regularly scheduled programing. Ahh yes, it's a rerun again...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Aussiesuede

Well as long as we're talking about silly and unworkable solutions to a problem, ill toss my silly solution into the mix.

Most of these "pirates" are young lads with far too much time on their hands. No matter where you go on the planet, that's an equation that always ends up with only one singular result - no good. Realising some basic realities at play, one can come up with solutions to dry up the supply of bored young me with too much time on their hands. The warlords obviously realised that there was an endless supply of these lads at hand and they created an attractant for them. They give them free drugs to keep them amped up, then send them out on their "pirating" ventures and give them a paltry sum of the proceeds. It would be smarter to start playing their game and simply beating them at it. Without a ready supply of young, bored, directionless recruits to exploit, they'd have great difficulty in fashioning their little pirating regattas.

So what is it that attracts 16-23 year old men the world over? That's right - punani. Set up protected red light districts 200 miles inland from any coasts. Completely surround them with UN troops and hardware. Monitor everyone that comes in and allow no guns to enter. Then advertise the hell out of the fact that all the whorehouses and bars are completely free. A young lad sitting in his squathouse in Eyl or Mogodishu bored out of his mind hears the honk of the 4 tmes hourly - bus to a red light district. What's he going to do? Jump up and run to that bus to free unlimited party & punani? Or take a trek down to the shore in hopes of getting on a pirate crew that will net him a few measley bucks that wouldn't be near enough to purchase some of the local for hire whores, and potentially getting shot at by some trigger happy soldier who is all too eager to notch a kill while he's doing "gods work"? I'm betting they could run those buses to the free red light district a minute apart and they'd still all be packed full of young men chasing the strongest attractant on earth. Heck, word of these districts got out, and young fellas from London to Chicago, to Sydney would be flocking to the Somali desert. (Charge those outsiders a fee for access and that forsaken country would have a much needed new revenue stream)

So as enticing as killing everyone in sight may seem, wouldn't it just be easier to give the young lads a place to play? At worse, it would at least be an untried solution as opposed to the "shoot em up" solution which we already KNOW NEVER WORKS. Seriously, when was the last time this "arm everyone and get em shooting at each other" worked?

Well that's my silly can't work solution. But since it doesn't involve shooting anyone, or blowing something up, it won't likely gain much traction. Now back to regularly scheduled programing. Ahh yes, it's a rerun again...

ROFL

[lawdawg]

We can have the captured pirates serve as the prostitutes.... Double deterrence

[kenny chaos]

Give it a minute. There will be someone here who wants to stop prostitution.
It's going to be a blue, christmas, without you..........

[simonmd]

The 'safe room' idea sound ideal for a large commercial vessel, assuming they've got time to get everyone inside but one thing i've never understood is why dont these vessels hire armed security guards to do the defending for them?

I wholeheartely aggree that your average civilian deackhand/engineer, etc. should not be expected to arm themselves, so why don't they hire proffessionals to do it? If you're famous or just rich, you can have an armed bodyguard in most parts of the world, so I don't see the problem with it. You could pick them up when entering dangerous waters and drop them off the other side to get another ship back, a bit like a pilot. I'm sure the insurance would come down too. It seems so obvious to me that there must be a legal or other reason why this doesn't happen already, anyone know what it is?

[Jon Hacking]

Originally Posted by simonmd

...one thing i've never understood is why don't these vessels hire armed security guards to do the defending for them?...

Good idea, Simon. One problem is that many ports, especially around the Middle East, don't allow weapons at all. I'm told some are considering changing that, but it's always difficult traveling with weapons, even if you're just going hunting in Africa.

One potential solution here is, as you say, leave it to the pros. Why not have the military put 3-4 guys (& their gear) on each ship before it transits the danger area? There would be a bit of a bottleneck at each end, where ships on/off-load their protectors, but some orgainization would sort that out.

Even us, a simple cruising couple, would welcome an armed military guy on board if/when we go through that area. And I think that when the pirates found out their prey had trained teeth, they'd run out of recruits pretty fast. Every story I've heard where boats fired back, the pirates have run away.