Soldiers onboard Belgian merchant fleet

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I think the solution to the piracy is something the shipping companies will have to solve. With all the money at stake it would make sense for them to form their own private security group. Where each boat could be escorted by a 7 man armed security boat. When the ships go into ports the security could stay in international waters bypassing the no arms in ports problem. It would up the cost of goods, but I think if they did it long enough the pirates would quit because it was not an easy target anymore.

It used to be the duty of the Navy's of the world to police for piracy. We dont need Blackwater of the High Seas. I am sorry. Thats a disaster of epic proportions waiting to happen.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I think the solution to the piracy is something the shipping companies will have to solve. With all the money at stake it would make sense for them to form their own private security group. Where each boat could be escorted by a 7 man armed security boat. When the ships go into ports the security could stay in international waters bypassing the no arms in ports problem. It would up the cost of goods, but I think if they did it long enough the pirates would quit because it was not an easy target anymore.

It used to be the duty of the Navy's of the world to police for piracy. We dont need Blackwater of the High Seas. I am sorry. Thats a disaster of epic proportions waiting to happen.

It is not our place to police the world, even though some may want us to.
Companies are not going to put crazed gunmen out their guarding ships, they have their stockholders and the public to answer to .

funny you mentioned blackwater as they have already started offering their services and put in application with the defense department last year to provide a private navy.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: freegeeks
linky

Our govt. decided to deploy soldiers onboard Belgian ships passing through waters of Somalia.
I have somewhat mixed feeling about this because of the possibility of escalation of violence

I would think 'escalation of violence' is a mjor point to deploying them.

But I suspect the escalation will be targeted at the pirates.

I keep seeing people expressing alarm about firing weapons around an oil tanker. Why? I hope it's a concern about polution/oil leaks. I hope it's not a concern about the oil exploding etc. Try to light a can of motor oil etc on fire and see how easy that is.

Fern

It is very much a risk of explosion. Tankers vent excess pressure from the tanks via high velocity vents but there always exists the possibility of gas settling around the ship if the wind conditions are right. It does not need a lot of gas to be in the flammable range (click on the diagram to enlarge).

A lot of precautions are taken to avoid any source of ignition. All tools used on board tankers are non-spark tools. Any equipment used is 'intrinsically safe' or 'explosion proof'. Even standard cell phones are not allowed to be used on deck, specially when carrying out any operations, loading discharging or tank cleaning / purging etc. These precautions are in place because of lessons learned over time and not because the industry is paranoid.

Oil pollution is also a concern which can also lead to a fire and explosion.

I have been on ships carrying crude / gasoline / diesel / naphtha and there is no way we would allow any source of ignition on those ships. The biggest danger on any ship (not just tankers) is fire, so those concerns are real and justified.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

-snip-
I have been on ships carrying crude / gasoline / diesel / naphtha and there is no way we would allow any source of ignition on those ships. The biggest danger on any ship (not just tankers) is fire, so those concerns are real and justified.

I can understand concerns with naptha & gasoline.

I do not understand concerns with diesel or crude. Diesel is used in boats and ships for the very reason that it is not explosive.

I tried your links but had trouble with them. Can you please explain why you think crude and diesel are explosive.

Fern

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
While the long term solution to actually fixing this problem is to help Somalia become less of a shithole, since that has proven difficult it certainly seems like some beefed up enforcement by everyone is a good short term solution.

The solution isn't to involve ourselves in Somalia as much as it is getting everyone else to disengage. Stop dumping shit in their waters ,stop stealing their fish, and stop invading the country to keep securing land interests.

Will some people keep pirating? Probably. And that is when you snipe them. The rest will just go on with theirlives

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
It is not our place to police the world, even though some may want us to.
Companies are not going to put crazed gunmen out their guarding ships, they have their stockholders and the public to answer to .

funny you mentioned blackwater as they have already started offering their services and put in application with the defense department last year to provide a private navy.

You're right, it's not our place to police the world, but the navies of all major countries could provide some safety. Either that, or put some soldiers on board ships for a while until the pirates decide that a 90% chance of death is not a good idea.

The idea of having mercenary companies like blackwater roaming the oceans is not a good one. Incidents like Abu Graib notwithstanding, military personnel have to abide by a code of conduct, they are accountable to someone for their conduct. Companies like blackwater would essentially become privateers / pirates not accountable to anyone, just like in Iraq. Bad idea.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: Modelworks
It is not our place to police the world, even though some may want us to.
Companies are not going to put crazed gunmen out their guarding ships, they have their stockholders and the public to answer to .

funny you mentioned blackwater as they have already started offering their services and put in application with the defense department last year to provide a private navy.

You're right, it's not our place to police the world, but the navies of all major countries could provide some safety. Either that, or put some soldiers on board ships for a while until the pirates decide that a 90% chance of death is not a good idea.

The idea of having mercenary companies like blackwater roaming the oceans is not a good one. Incidents like Abu Graib notwithstanding, military personnel have to abide by a code of conduct, they are accountable to someone for their conduct. Companies like blackwater would essentially become privateers / pirates not accountable to anyone, just like in Iraq. Bad idea.

Can't place soldiers on ships and it is dangerous to do so . Stray gun fire or fire fights on a ship could result in losing the ship entirely. A separate boat can engage targets away from the main ships.

They would have to answer to someone , the companies that pay them. Money is often a better motivator than the laws of any court.

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Can't place soldiers on ships and it is dangerous to do so

Can't place soldiers on ships? Huh? Isn't that exactly what is being done now by Belgium and other countries?

. Stray gun fire or fire fights on a ship could result in losing the ship entirely. A separate boat can engage targets away from the main ships.

Agreed, there is an increased risk, and shipping companies can weigh that risk.

They would have to answer to someone , the companies that pay them. Money is often a better motivator than the laws of any court.

No, the companies that pay them would not care about anything except the safety of their ships. The mercs could kill innocents, torture "pirates" they pick up etc, and they would not be accountable to anyone. We've seen how that game works, it doesn't work very well. It might very well be effective, but at a high cost.

 

[nullzero]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: nullzero
Interesting idea it sounds like a good plan. I think escalation of violence is over rated. The pirates most harmful weapon is the RPG... the RPG will not take down a huge freight liner. Trained military will wipe out the Somali pirates every time and it will make them think twice when picking a ship to attack.

a RPG can go through 12 inches of steel... if the RPG is fired close enough at the engine room it can take out a cargo ship with one shot. or they can get real lucky and hit the bridge...

I like to see the test of an RPG-7 with a HE round going through 12 inches of steel. Most of the surplus ones out there do not even have the specialized sharped armor piecing rounds. They are mostly HE fragmentation and anti infantry ones that have almost no penetration.

This is nothing compared to the newer ones that the Russian military uses now and Somali pirates do not have. Now on a ship carrying oil or natural gas it would be safer not to engage in conflict because of risk of leak or fire. But for a dry bulk large freight ship a RPG poses less of a risk.

You get 3 guys on each ship with 2 sniper rifles and a machine gun it would effectively neutralize most pirate attacks. Having a early warning system with cameras and IDing the targets would be the most critical part.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble

Originally posted by: Modelworks
Can't place soldiers on ships and it is dangerous to do so

Can't place soldiers on ships? Huh? Isn't that exactly what is being done now by Belgium and other countries?

The problem is that you have to shuttle them on and off ships. They can't be on board when the ship goes to port. I'm also guessing that some countries will even take issue with that claiming everything from weapon smuggling to espionage. Some of the countries those ships dock in are not very USA friendly.

It is just something I would like to see someone else solve rather than us for a change.

 

[RabidMongoose]

This is a horrible idea. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Belgians fired on innocent Somalian fishermen or whatever. We need international observers following these Belgian ships. I just don't trust them.

 

[Acanthus]

Fantastic idea.

This particular implementation means that the Belgians will only be defending their vessel. This will be a very effective deterrant.

It's not like the belgians will be pursuing pirates in a merchant ship to brutalize Somalis.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
This is a horrible idea. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Belgians fired on innocent Somalian fishermen or whatever. We need international observers following these Belgian ships. I just don't trust them.

Its easy to identify pirates vs fisherman

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: Fern
-snip-

-snip-
I have been on ships carrying crude / gasoline / diesel / naphtha and there is no way we would allow any source of ignition on those ships. The biggest danger on any ship (not just tankers) is fire, so those concerns are real and justified.

I can understand concerns with naptha & gasoline.

I do not understand concerns with diesel or crude. Diesel is used in boats and ships for the very reason that it is not explosive.

I tried your links but had trouble with them. Can you please explain why you think crude and diesel are explosive.

Fern

Among all the various petroleum based products carried on tankers crude oil is probably the most dangerous. Crude contains everything from the heavy stuff like waxy sludge to all the fines including naphtha and spirits. The flash point of crude is all over the place. At least with products you have a defined range for each product.

In the seventies there were many incidents of explosion on large crude carriers (almost all when they were tank cleaning or empty) which were analyzed and they realized that the high pressure water jets used to clean the tanks were building enough static to cause explosions in the tanks as the tank atmosphere was always within the flammable range of some component of crude or the other.

Oil tankers are broadly divided into 2 categories - crude carriers (or black oil carriers) and product carriers (white oil carriers). Product carriers will typically carry one type of product at a time. Or if they are carrying 2 or more different products, these are well segregated in different sets of tanks. So, on product carriers you generally know the limits of what you are dealing with.

After the industry better understood the cause of the explosions it became standard practice to inert cargo tanks on crude ships. Use of inert gas on product tankers is a recent phenomenon.


Edit:

While diesel (called gas oil in the industry) is not as volatile as naphtha or gasoline, it still has a flash point of around 130 - 140 deg F. Diesel is used on ships for generators and other aux engines. The ships main engine uses Heavy Fuel Oil which has to heated to about 200 deg F before it is injected into the engine. This is not practical for generators which is why diesel is used.

Having said that, using these fuels to run the engines and carrying them as cargo are 2 different scenarios. When carried as cargo the risks are much higher which is why the standard industry practice of taking precautions to avoid any sources of ignition. Firearms are a horrible idea on tankers. I know I would not be willing to sail on a tanker which carries men with firearms.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
It is not our place to police the world, even though some may want us to.

when it comes to the seas, yes it is.

 

[freegeeks]

Ships sailing international waters are under the jurisdiction of the flag state. A Belgian flagged ship in international waters is in fact a little piece of Belgian territory. That's why there is no legal problem with stationing soldiers aboard these ships. In a legal sense they are protecting the integrity of the territory, it's much like the protection of an embassy.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: freegeeks
Ships sailing international waters are under the jurisdiction of the flag state. A Belgian flagged ship in international waters is in fact a little piece of Belgian territory. That's why there is no legal problem with stationing soldiers aboard these ships. In a legal sense they are protecting the integrity of the territory, it's much like the protection of an embassy.

The problem with that logic is that you are now taking your soldiers to every country that the ship visits. How many countries are comfortable having foreign armies visit their shores uninvited, or on business?

In principle having armed guards to protect a ship from pirates sounds good. Practically it's going to lead to a lot of headaches at EVERY port the ship goes to.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: freegeeks
Ships sailing international waters are under the jurisdiction of the flag state. A Belgian flagged ship in international waters is in fact a little piece of Belgian territory. That's why there is no legal problem with stationing soldiers aboard these ships. In a legal sense they are protecting the integrity of the territory, it's much like the protection of an embassy.

The problem with that logic is that you are now taking your soldiers to every country that the ship visits. How many countries are comfortable having foreign armies visit their shores uninvited, or on business?

In principle having armed guards to protect a ship from pirates sounds good. Practically it's going to lead to a lot of headaches at EVERY port the ship goes to.

I don't know the details but there is already a Belgian warship in the area. Maybe they just drop the military team on the civil vessel when they are in international waters and then retrieve them when they are past the danger zone. This way they don't have to deal with soldiers in ports.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
While the long term solution to actually fixing this problem is to help Somalia become less of a shithole, since that has proven difficult it certainly seems like some beefed up enforcement by everyone is a good short term solution.

You can only help those that want to be helped. Those that have lived a life of relying on foreigners for aid will live that way because it's easier than standing up and doing something for yourself.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Modelworks
I think the solution to the piracy is something the shipping companies will have to solve. With all the money at stake it would make sense for them to form their own private security group. Where each boat could be escorted by a 7 man armed security boat. When the ships go into ports the security could stay in international waters bypassing the no arms in ports problem. It would up the cost of goods, but I think if they did it long enough the pirates would quit because it was not an easy target anymore.

It used to be the duty of the Navy's of the world to police for piracy. We dont need Blackwater of the High Seas. I am sorry. Thats a disaster of epic proportions waiting to happen.

It is not our place to police the world, even though some may want us to.
Companies are not going to put crazed gunmen out their guarding ships, they have their stockholders and the public to answer to .

funny you mentioned blackwater as they have already started offering their services and put in application with the defense department last year to provide a private navy.

I do not think merchant ships will arm their crews or put security teams onboard. Shippers resist the extra cost and ship owners, port authorities, unions, and others oppose the idea. It just has no traction. The risk remains small. 33,000 ships pass through the Gulf of Aden annually and less than one-third of one percent are attacked, and even less are taken.