Article

2012-05-16 Africa Horn

Private navy planned to counter pirate raids

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2012-05-16 00:32|| || Front Page|| [7 views ] Top

#1 Extensive training for Night-time Security + prolly a few Mini-Depth Charges, LAWS since at last check the Pirate Boyz were interested in acquiring fast Stealth Boats + Mini-Subs.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-05-16 01:15|| 2012-05-16 01:15|| Front Page Top

#2 Offset the costs by offering Pirate Safari Tours. Fresh sea air and target practice, ah heaven!

Posted by Steven 2012-05-16 01:59|| 2012-05-16 01:59|| Front Page Top

#3 It's on and no reason to bring anything "Partisan" into it. Go protect your clients.

Posted by newc 2012-05-16 03:37|| 2012-05-16 03:37|| Front Page Top

#4 Hijacking these vessels is a pretty profitable business. It could escalate in intensity pretty quickly. In other words, most of the pirates are fairly lightly armed because they can be. This force, if it starts making a serious dent in the profits of the pirates, should expect to see a fairly significant escalation in the weapons and tactics used.

To some extent we might see some kind of symbiotic relationship develop much like we have with the drug cartels and the DEA where the two entities rely on each other. The security company might allow the pirates enough success to stay in business in order to keep the security company in business. The security companies would act as a barrier to competition for the more hard core pirates keeping the wannabe pirates out of the market and the hard core pirates keep the security company in business.

Note that the job of the security company is not to eliminate the pirates, it is to protect the ships so the company would actually have a vested economic interest in making sure the pirates aren't completely eliminated.

Posted by crosspatch 2012-05-16 05:17|| 2012-05-16 05:17|| Front Page Top

#5 The Somalis don't have the talent to attack anything but an unarmed vessel.

Posted by gromky 2012-05-16 05:50|| 2012-05-16 05:50|| Front Page Top

#6 gromky, if the CEP relies on non-lethal deterrance the pirates will live long enough to develop the talent.

Posted by Glenmore 2012-05-16 07:33|| 2012-05-16 07:33|| Front Page Top

#7 and 0.50 calibre heavy machine guns

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2012-05-16 08:08|| 2012-05-16 08:08|| Front Page Top

#8 Perhaps JLT has airport security and border patrol divisions.

Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-16 08:40|| 2012-05-16 08:40|| Front Page Top

#9 Don't be too sure of that, Gromky. They're not stupid.

Under-estimating the intelligence and will of your opponent is always a bad idea.

Posted by Steve White 2012-05-16 08:47|| 2012-05-16 08:47|| Front Page Top

#10 Definitely enough to give pirates a large incentive to "be some place else".

U N C L A S S I F I E D / FRUO //

FM/UNIT/RBURGINT/J-2//
TO/COMNAVRBURG/COMNAVCENT/RBURG-ALLCON//
UNCLAS/FRUO//
OPER/SPOOKWATCH//
MSGID/SWAGREP/SR-001/161852ZNOV12//
PART/1/OF/3//
LOC/UTM:13N4398808501356//
SUBJ/Possible article error and correction//

INF1/ 150ft patrol boat, Swedish. 150ft is Corvette size, generally with larger minimum crews than cited (25+ enlisted, 14+ officers). Expensive to operate in numbers cited (7). //

H/ Reporter Error. //

NARR/ Terminology error. RHIB, not "rib". This indicates the reporter got the data verbally (not written). Further indicates the reporter is not familiar with military naval terminology, particularly riverine, patrol and brown water operations. Also, larger ships of the cited size, unless mine layers or transports, are generally armed with more than two (2) 12.7mm (.50 cal) HMG. //

CON: Type is probably correct: fast patrol boat. Length reported is likely in error. Reporter may be accustomed to meters, and converted to feet for an American publication. 50 Feet is the likely length, reporter treated it as 50m and made the rough conversion to 150ft. //

PART/1/OF/3/END//

U N C L A S S I F I E D / FRUO //

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 12:01|| 2012-05-16 12:01|| Front Page Top

#11 FM/UNIT/RBURGINT/J-2//
TO/COMNAVRBURG/COMNAVCENT/RBURG-ALLCON//
UNCLAS/FRUO//
OPER/SPOOKWATCH//
MSGID/SWAGREP/SR-001/161852ZNOV12//
PART/2/OF/3//
LOC/UTM:13N4398808501356//
SUBJ/Possible article error and correction//

SUM/ The CB90 is the best candidate for the boat in question for these operations. GFiven the correct lenght of 50 feet, it meets all the other ideal operational and logistical considerations. Fast, maneuverable, can host an RHIB and combat crew(see below for cargo capacity), is crewed with 8 as cited. Armor can withstand typical Somali pirate attacks, up to and including RPG7, although the latter could pose a problem were it to hit near the waterline or bridge. It is also well enough armed, and can operate heavy weaponry as needed (Hellfire missiles, see below, c.f. Norweigan Naval tests elsewhere). Armament of twin 12.7 HMG (50 cal) is sufficient given multiple craft in operation on the same convoy. Logistically, large enough to do the job, but light enough footprint to reduce cost and supply consumption on a low intensity operation. Additionally, consider CB90 can use a simple (inexpensive) small freighter as a support ship for this sort of operation, plus the proximity of 4 (estimated) large container/tankers nearby in convoy for additional logistics support. //

ACMNT/ There are many CB90 in service world wide. The USN that operates 2 of these as "Riverine Command Boats" and the Mexican navy operates approximately 40. Sweden is known to have 200, so they might have spares. Sweden and the manufacturer have been known to lease them out for security operations (c.f. German Navy and operations against Greenpeace RHIB threats). There are also 15+ with the Malaysian navy to the east of the AO for hiring of trained support personnel on a temporary basis. //

PART/2/OF/3/END//

U N C L A S S I F I E D // FRUO

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 12:04|| 2012-05-16 12:04|| Front Page Top

#12 U N C L A S S I F I E D // FRUO

FM/UNIT/RBURGINT/J-2//
TO/COMNAVRBURG/COMNAVCENT/RBURG-ALLCON//
UNCLAS/FRUO//
OPER/SPOOKWATCH//
MSGID/SWAGREP/SR-001/161852ZNOV12//
PART/3/OF/3//
LOC/UTM:13N4398808501356//
SUBJ/Possible article error and correction//

REF/

[D]esigned to operate as a fast attack boat, patrol boat and special operations support vessel. Heavy machine guns are mounted in fixed installations, or stabilized and remotely controlled from a monitor in the wheelhouse. The boat can also carry mines or Hellfire missiles [emphasis added], and a gyro-stabilized twin-barrel 12-cm mortar. The boats have a loading capacity of 21 armed soldiers or up to 4.5 tons of cargo. The boat uses two waterjet propulsion units, equipped with two MAN D2842 LE410 main engines, each with a medium duty rating of 810 kW and two Rolls-Royce Kamewa FF-410 with waterjets, the 16 meter boat has a sprint speed of 50 knots and a cruise at 42 kt, and high maneuverability.//

RMKS: This fake report (SWAGREP) brought to you by an overly inquisitive OldSpook's curiosity and a HUGE amount of being bored. //

PART/3/OF/3/END//

U N C L A S S I F I E D // FRUO

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 12:07|| 2012-05-16 12:07|| Front Page Top

#13 I think crosspatch has the proper biz case down.

Posted by Water Modem 2012-05-16 14:03|| 2012-05-16 14:03|| Front Page Top

#14 OldSpook, that boat looks like a heckuva lotta fun.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-05-16 14:39|| 2012-05-16 14:39|| Front Page Top

#15 They're not stupid.

Under-estimating the intelligence and will of your opponent is always a bad idea.
The Somali pirates have been making millions of dollars a year for several years now. They would be stupid not to buy armaments to defend their positions.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2012-05-16 15:29|| 2012-05-16 15:29|| Front Page Top

#16 I predict an arms race. And I expect (hope, anyway) the pirate's financial backers might be exposed.

Posted by Whiskey Mike 2012-05-16 15:37|| 2012-05-16 15:37|| Front Page Top

#17 Defending thier position is fine - its preventing them from having a viable ability to attack that this accomplishes. Deterrent needs to be sufficient, and this, coupled with larger (NATO and national) naval assets in the area (look up CTF-150), are very likely to make any attempts at vessel seizure not only unsuccessful, but fatal.

Its a deterrent. All they need to do is put up a sufficient fight, and buy time for NATO/USN forces to respond.

The only way the "defense" enters into it is if we (meaning the US/UK) go ashore or bomb the crap out of the docks and boatyards. And honestly, following the money is likely to be the more effective path in terms of getting the real bad guys behind this. The skinnies that die at sea are just cannon fodder for the ones pulling the strings.

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 15:45|| 2012-05-16 15:45|| Front Page Top

#18 One other thing: the "non lethal" stuff is window dressing to assuage legal concerns. "Warning shots" may end up "accidentally" without enough lead and too low... Some interpretations of Common Law and Maritime law allows pirates to be summarily executed. And this is a private company, working in international waters or under "universal jurisdiction" in unpoliced territorial waters (Somalia for example).

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 15:53|| 2012-05-16 15:53|| Front Page Top

#19 "In 2011, 31 ransoms were paid to Somali pirates, totaling around $160 million. The average ransom was approximately $5 million"

Those are the REPORTED cases. You can buy a lot of weaponry for $160 million/year. Each event is a potential $5 million job so you can afford to spend a million or two PER JOB in the execution of it if that is what it takes. I am not sure the private company can afford to spend that kind of money per defense on top of the overhead in vigilance between attacks.

When the pirates aren't pirating, they aren't spending any money but the security company IS because it doesn't know from where/when the next attack is going to come.

My guess is they won't be contracted by the shippers themselves but by the insurance companies.

If I were this security company, I would also use drones to extend my horizon a bit. In fact, I would love to have drones in the air pretty much the entire time and track the comings and goings of vessels from Somalia. When there is an attack somewhere, just rewind the tape and find out where it came from (might be a different place from where it goes after an attack).

Or outfit what amounts to a couple of civilian J-STARS and just watch traffic for a while with no interdiction until you establish exactly where they are operating out of.

Problem with all these scenarios is that it eventually becomes obvious that if we really wanted to shut down these pirates, we could, but for some reason we aren't.

That leads me to believe there's probably also some sort of "protection" racket operating in conjunction with the pirates that has some major pull. $160 million a year is also a lot of campaign donations to politicians ... globally ... and if you are making nearly as much of protection as off the piracy, make that $320 million.

That we even still have this problem stinks. If you see politicians moving to shut this company down, that will stink even more.

Posted by crosspatch 2012-05-16 18:22|| 2012-05-16 18:22|| Front Page Top

#20 The article itself says it is an Insurance company that set this up. They sell lower cost insurance to the shipper if the shipper contracts their "pet" security company to convoy them. For the insurance company, short of hiring some former SOCOM/SAS types and killing a lot of people in the chain of violence that are behind this, its a cost effective move for them.

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 19:47|| 2012-05-16 19:47|| Front Page Top

#21 And if I were a betting man, I'd say one of Soro's branches has a tentacle in it. Probably on both sides.

Posted by OldSpook 2012-05-16 19:48|| 2012-05-16 19:48|| Front Page Top

#22 Or some of the Russian oligopolists.

Posted by crosspatch 2012-05-16 20:38|| 2012-05-16 20:38|| Front Page Top

#23 Based on the open source info that the prospective craft are ex-Swedish, the possible is a Bevakningsbat (type late-60 or 70) class. They were stricken from the navy in recent years.

Posted by Pappy 2012-05-16 22:18|| 2012-05-16 22:18|| Front Page Top

23:27 canalzone
22:18 Pappy
21:57 phil_b
21:34 rammer
21:06 JosephMendiola
20:49 JosephMendiola
20:38 crosspatch
20:00 OldSpook
19:57 OldSpook
19:48 OldSpook
19:47 Besoeker
19:47 OldSpook
18:57 Gabby Cussworth
18:42 crosspatch
18:22 crosspatch
18:20 Gabby Cussworth
18:16 Gabby Cussworth
18:00 DarthVader
17:57 Yyeah
17:55 Pomat buray
17:31 American Delight
17:29 Gupo Buddah Dan Rust Inzhanzen
17:25 newc
17:13 mojo