Navy team boards and destroys pirate ship

#1
Ministry of Defence said:
A Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessel, deployed as part of an international naval task force operating in the Somali Basin, has located, boarded and destroyed a pirate whaling vessel found to be carrying assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades.

More...
 
#3
Nice to see some action for a change; too many times they've had to stand back, their hands tied by politicians/ CoC.
 
#4
Great news........ something I always thought should be the priority, if they can identify the mother- ships and destroy them, the b*stards aren't going anywhere.
 
#5
This story first went out on 25 Oct, unless there was an identical incident a week later.

The nine suspected pirates were transferred to the smaller skiff, the Royal
Marines permanently disabled their brand new outboard engine and handed them
oars.
Royal must have been very, very smug. Row you skinny bastards, row! For an auxiliary and despite her bright orange lifeboats, Fort Victoria looks very warry and has two Phalanx mounted. To the pirates she must have looked like the Death Star coming over the horizon.
 
#6
So why are we putting a multi-million pound Warship, filled with every doo-hicky in NATO, and about 200 matelots, in the Somali Basin, when we can put 50 civvies (with some T&C restrictions), a up-graded MV and 12 blokes who could be pongoes, and achieve exactly the same effect.

Way to go Navy Command, nothing like under-selling ourselves......
 
#7
So why are we putting a multi-million pound Warship, filled with every doo-hicky in NATO, and about 200 matelots, in the Somali Basin, when we can put 50 civvies (with some T&C restrictions), a up-graded MV and 12 blokes who could be pongoes, and achieve exactly the same effect.

Way to go Navy Command, nothing like under-selling ourselves......
Come on now, a successful operation all round. Somali pirates given the pincent & Redgrave treatment and no-one got their iPod stolen.
 
#8
That part of the world is crawling with terrorists anyway. Somalia, Yemen......hmmm.
 
#9
So why are we sending Warships to do it, if an RFA is perfectly adequate? That is the question I'd be asking NCHQ if I were the MoD....
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
According to yesterday's news the pirates have just collected several million pounds in two ransoms so losing this boat will hardly hurt at all. Good hit though, even if it will not have lasting results.
 
#11
According to yesterday's news the pirates have just collected several million pounds in two ransoms so losing this boat will hardly hurt at all. Good hit though, even if it will not have lasting results.
Unless we get into an old school close blockade of the "pirate havens", then no maritime action will have a lasting result on piracy. This issue can only be solved by a ruthless application of the comprehensive effect, probably with FCO/DfID leading. The only reason we're doing something about this is a) we were hanging around in the area anyway and b) media pressure. If we really cared about piracy effecting maritime security, we'd be in the Gulf of Guinea, against the petro-criminals based out of Nigeria, instead of faffing around 2 failing states.
 
#12
So why are we sending Warships to do it, if an RFA is perfectly adequate? That is the question I'd be asking NCHQ if I were the MoD....
An RFA isn't perfectly adequate. It is a force multiplier and will be probably also have a logistics role for the warships in theatre.
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#13
An RFA isn't perfectly adequate. It is a force multiplier and will be probably also have a logistics role for the warships in theatre.
Except the British contribution now is primarily RFA-based. Remeber the 2 tachties being whisked away under the noses of the "Navy?" RFA vessel. There was a lot of talk then about not reacting becasue the personnel weren't trained. A lot less questions about why an oil tanker is doing a frigate's job. Anybody guess at the answer?
 
#14
Except the British contribution now is primarily RFA-based.
Is the British contribution primarily RFA based?

There was a lot of talk then about not reacting becasue the personnel weren't trained.
A lot of talk. Jolly Jack is not any more adept at hostage rescue than the RFA who aren't adept at all. Hostage rescue is the remit of Special Forces. Brassing up a boat full of pirates iaw extant ROE is well within the scope of the RFA. Selectively slotting pirates while sparing the innocent hostages, that's hard...so Dinger tells me. Just what capabilities the RFA Captain had at his disposal are the subject of much speculation as is exactly how compromised the Chandlers were when Wave Knight rocked up and who said what to whom.
A lot less questions about why an oil tanker is doing a frigate's job. Anybody guess at the answer?
Because it got there first? There is a lot of oggin to cover. Every little helps.
 
#15
But if I were a bean-counter, I would submit that the RFA is "adequate"; it's not perfect, probably requires some queuing from elsewhere (aren't coalitions great!), but it's a lot cheaper, doesn't have huge amounts of GFE, and to top it all off, can multi-role in the logs role (and so can add something to the coalition as well as taking a C4ISTAR feed from it).

I'm being glib (a bit), but thoughts like this will be running through RP heads everywhere whenever we highlight stories like this. Offer up the risk to the JCB enough times, and once or twice they may take it. Look at it this way, if a T23 observed the Chandler situation they would've reacted in exactly the same way, so where is the difference?
 

Bouillabaisse

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Is the British contribution primarily RFA based?



A lot of talk. Jolly Jack is not any more adept at hostage rescue than the RFA who aren't adept at all. Hostage rescue is the remit of Special Forces. Brassing up a boat full of pirates iaw extant ROE is well within the scope of the RFA. Selectively slotting pirates while sparing the innocent hostages, that's hard...so Dinger tells me. Just what capabilities the RFA Captain had at his disposal are the subject of much speculation as is exactly how compromised the Chandlers were when Wave Knight rocked up and who said what to whom.


Because it got there first? There is a lot of oggin to cover. Every little helps.
I was not suggesting that either the RN or RFA have a pop at the pirates. I was merely pointing out that nobody seemed to notice that the RN was using auxiliaries to conduct piracy patrols Wave Knight got there first not because she happened to be in the area but because she was patrolling the area, a task for which we used to have frigates.

As to the british contribution, you know as well as I do that the RFA are now being used for tasks that the RN used to do with a frigate. West Indies Guard Ship?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top