Just how does one hijack an oil tanker anyway?

[KGT1200]

Leesee here, I have a 17ft. Glastron

My buddy Adee has a 1970s 14 Ft. Chriscraft. We have two Thompson Machine Guns....

The oil tanker walls are 55 Ft. up, if you look real close you can make out the tiny little heads of a couple of guys looking over the railing..

The Tanker is moving west at 17 knots into open sea, and we estimate it will take about 8 miles for the tanker to stop. there is a large squall that will capsize our crafts and the pontoon with 30 of our compandres waiting for us to stop the boat.


The men on the tanker see us waiving our guns, so they drop a ladder.

Sounds easy enough!


gimme a break!

Does anybody know the details? How de do dat?

[Motor31]

Tanker is unarmed. Tanker is filled with flammable substance. Pirates armed with small arms and RPG's. RPG and flammable substance (LOTS of flammable substance) not a good mix for longevity of tanker crew. Pirates also faster and more maneuverable than tanker.

It's a gamble on both sides. Pirates gambling that they can convince tanker to stop or allow boarding without setting it on fire. Tanker crew is gambling that the pirate won't set the tanker on fire if they allow them to board and take the ship.

Pretty simple really. :doh

[pffog]

Time for the insurance companies to hire some "contract workers" to man some .50 cal machine guns on deck.

[BeemerMike]

Time for the insurance companies to hire some "contract workers" to man some .50 cal machine guns on deck.

To protect a $100M cargo, not to mention the hugely expensive ship, I was thinking more like four Phalanx stations (two on each side, one forward and one aft) . . . assuming the Phalanx control radar can target small objects on the surface of the ocean the same as it can small, fast, inbound aerial targets! :eek

[RJM2096]

Do pirates hijack tankers? With the price of crude it is amazing they would want the oil. It is not like they can unload it into pickups.

[Mika]

Reuters has been running some very informative pieces all day. This piece from earlier in the day gives some background on the how and who questions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4AH3TL20081118

[RJM2096]

Reuters has been running some very informative pieces all day. This piece from earlier in the day gives some background on the how and who questions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4AH3TL20081118

Thanks for the link. It kind of looks like they just want a ransom for the crew and no real interest in the oil.

[Troutluck]

Job Description
Tanker Crewman

Steer tanker - CHECK
Maintain mechanicals - CHECK
File reports - CHECK
Repel pirates - CHE . . WAIT A MINUTE! WTF?!

[hlothery]

To protect a $100M cargo, not to mention the hugely expensive ship, I was thinking more like four Phalanx stations (two on each side, one forward and one aft) . . . assuming the Phalanx control radar can target small objects on the surface of the ocean the same as it can small, fast, inbound aerial targets! :eek

The Phalanx ......I like that idea, a 20mm is an formidable round, especially at that rate of fire. Or maybe we could bait a few of them, with an Apache gunship under wraps on deck. That would be fun to watch.

[JK]

Leesee here, I have a 17ft. Glastron

My buddy Adee has a 1970s 14 Ft. Chriscraft. We have two Thompson Machine Guns....

The oil tanker walls are 55 Ft. up, if you look real close you can make out the tiny little heads of a couple of guys looking over the railing..

The Tanker is moving west at 17 knots into open sea, and we estimate it will take about 8 miles for the tanker to stop. there is a large squall that will capsize our crafts and the pontoon with 30 of our compandres waiting for us to stop the boat.


The men on the tanker see us waiving our guns, so they drop a ladder.

Sounds easy enough!

gimme a break!

Does anybody know the details? How de do dat?

Hi Dale -

Never underestimate the determination, intelligence, and resourcefulness of an enemy.

For example, when Ramzi Yousef plotted to splash a dozen UAL/NWA B-747s thirteen years ago, his network acquired and used airline maintenance/operation records/schedules to coordinated the placement and detonation of explosives (by aircraft tail numbers), so that the event would occur simultaneously. Because these mx/ops schedules were in Yousef's possession, it was assumed he had "inside" help and cooperation.

Likewise, merchant marine crews are easy to infiltrate, given their lax hiring practices, poor pay, and international composition. Same's true for those scheduling the logistics of cargo route and transit. Given the proper motivation, information/intel can be gleened to strike specific targets. Furthermore, secure communication and location solutions are available, realtime, by way of satellites.

In short, it's all about risk vs reward. :deal

J.K. :wow

[BONEY]

Just how does one hijack an oil tanker anyway?

Yes, and perhaps if a few of us could pull it off, our riding habits could be funded for a while.:laugh

Seriously though, I've thought for a long time that the ships need contract security workers who will fire at any non-military vessel that approaches them.

[hlothery]

Yes, and perhaps if a few of us could pull it off, our riding habits could be funded for a while.:laugh

Seriously though, I've thought for a long time that the ships need contract security workers who will fire at any non-military vessel that approaches them.

Problem is, the pirates have shoulder-fired rocket systems with quite a range, as well as RPGs and 50cal machine guns. The contracted security personel have to have weapons systems which can out-gun those. The ship is an easy target, a small speedboat (or swiftboat, if you will) is not. One would need to be able to identify them as hostile, and then engage them at a range greater than their missles, or risk catastrophic damage to the ship, and the environment (in the case of a supertanker).

[eaganj346]

This is from an article about the hijacked tanker;

"Maritime security experts said the pirates had approached the tanker from the stern in speedboats and thrown grapnel hooks tied to rope ladders, most likely boarding unopposed as the ship cruised on auto-pilot with nobody keeping watch on the bridge."

25 man crew on a ship about the length of an aircraft carrier (3x the displacement). No lookouts, no radar watch apparently, everybody is below.



John http://www.bmwmoa.org/forum/images/smilies/headscratch.gif

[Mika]

This incident isn't particularly new news. I can remember reading articles in Sail and Cruising World magazines of the ‘There be pirates in them waters’ nature back in the early seventies. The articles at that time pointed out it had been going on for a long time. What has changed is the pirate infrastructure and equipment has grown in a way that allows them to take on hijacking a super tanker.

There have been various naval forces operating in this area trying to deal with pirates since the Suez Canal opened in 1869 to today. The US, Britain and Russia have large groups assigned to the area but to no avail in this case.

[hlothery]

This incident isn't particularly new news. I can remember reading articles in Sail and Cruising World magazines of the ‘There be pirates in them waters’ nature back in the early seventies. The articles at that time pointed out it had been going on for a long time. What has changed is the pirate infrastructure and equipment has grown in a way that allows them to take on hijacking a super tanker.

There have been various naval forces operating in this area trying to deal with pirates since the Suez Canal opened in 1869 to today. The US, Britain and Russia have large groups assigned to the area but to no avail in this case.

The main difference in this particular escalation, as I understand it, is that it happened over 400 miles out to sea. The various naval forces do not have the ability, as currently configured, to patrol an area that large. If this continues, it will be difficult to combat. By the time anyone can get there, the ship has been captured, and then rescue attempts risk the ship and the aforementioned ecological nightmare.

[KGT1200]

What I heard in a brief report early this morning (BBC world report) is what IS new news is how far out in the sea this group traveled to get to this ship. This is not a group of idiots with 50 year old submachine guns traveling in broken up, American reject boats (my attempt at black humor in my original post).

What concerns me more than anything is the reality that this is the best Target out there? nothing easier, better odds of success?

I have a friend who came from Somali in 2007, and left because the lack of ANYTHING from charcoal to cook, to anything to cook, and the constant danger that surrounded him and his family. The tranditional way has been hijacked (sorry, black humor attempt again) by the pirates, who have lifted and destroyed any thing of value. From what Fadumo tells the government is one massive bribe, and the control of the govenment, the system is broken; he fears for those of his clan who remin in Somalia.

Red

[swall]

Back in the olden days, when vessels were powered with steam turbines rather than giant diesels, you had steam hoses for fire fighting, among other things. These would be an effective device for repelling boarders. Assuming someone is still on watch, that is.

[tessler]

The Phalanx ......I like that idea, a 20mm is an formidable round, especially at that rate of fire. Or maybe we could bait a few of them, with an Apache gunship under wraps on deck. That would be fun to watch.So is an episode of Mythbusters! (http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/mythbusters.html) :ha

Whomever would be able to underwrite that level of protection, more power to 'em.

[Ted]

http://www.modelguns-worldwide.com/images/rpg7a.jpg

"The RPG-7's maximum effective range against moving targets is 300 meters and the maximum range is 920 meters, and it can penetrate up to 600 millimeters (23 inches) of rolled homogeneous steel armor." (Source (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7322267/description.html), a great primer on armor designed to protect against such)

Modern supertanker outer walls are only 14 to 16 millimeters thick.

Needless to say, pointing a few of these at the broad side of a slow-moving cargo vessel is an effective incentive to quickly and peacefully cooperate.

[rocketman]

http://www.modelguns-worldwide.com/images/rpg7a.jpg

"The RPG-7's maximum effective range against moving targets is 300 meters and the maximum range is 920 meters, and it can penetrate up to 600 millimeters (23 inches) of rolled homogeneous steel armor." (Source (http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7322267/description.html), a great primer on armor designed to protect against such)

Modern supertanker outer walls are only 14 to 16 millimeters thick.

Needless to say, pointing a few of these at the broad side of a slow-moving cargo vessel is an effective incentive to quickly and peacefully cooperate.

yeah but, would you want to be 300 meters from a supertanker when those things hit? And then what would the hijackers have left to "jack"? :dunno (think Jacksh*t!)

Now if it were an attack intent on just blowing the scuker up, well yeah, but I'd stay well back! (lots more that 300 meters)

On the other hand, if I was ON the tanker and someone pointed at the ship, yeah I'd probably "pull over" as well seeing as how being on board, I'd be rather unlikely to survive!

needless to say, I'd make a losey tanker capitan OR highjacker....:lol

RM

[BeemerMike]

Here's another way to deal with the pirates.

http://news.aol.com/article/indian-navy-sinks-pirates-mother-ship/232183

:thumb

[swall]

And the score, at the top of the seventh, is Indians 1, Pirates 0.

[HexST]

I thought it was more like Indians one Pirates 88

[The_Veg]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97241722

[Mika]

If the Tavern of the Screen were around I would make an observation about the Indian Navy was force to blow a pirate mother ship out of the water not a NATO or Russian vessel and wonder about the statement that makes for safety and control of the Indian Ocean and passage through the Suez Canal. But this is Campfire and not the TOS so never mind.
:bolt

[PGlaves]

If the Tavern of the Screen were around I would make an observation about the Indian Navy was force to blow a pirate mother ship out of the water not a NATO or Russian vessel and wonder about the statement that makes for safety and control of the Indian Ocean and passage through the Suez Canal. But this is Campfire and not the TOS so never mind.
:bolt

Well ...... why do you suppose they call it the "Indian Ocean?"

[GrafikFeat]

I've many stories about Thai Fisherman/Pirates preying on Vietnamese refugees in the South China Sea in the late 70's... Pretty brutal stuff.

Many "incidents" not making the evening news back home...

[Rob Nye]

Greetings,

Merchant ships by definition must be unarmed, other wise they become warships and can be targeted as such.

Do you want a fully loaded oil tanker arriving in New York Harbor armed to the teeth with who knows on board as crew? I don't.

Pirates come along side with fast boats and long ladders with hooks or they have grappling hooks on ropes. It is actually very easy to bring a small boat along side a tanker and hold it there at 17kts, that's how pilots get on and off. The VLCC was probably going about that speed, our ships are going 12 or so.

The stern of a tanker is a huge blind spot from the bridge. One of the most very basic rules of the road is overtaken vessel has right of way, other than radar there is no requirement that you keep a lookout looking back at where you were, lookouts are supposed to be looking forward.

The ships don't stop when the pirates show up, if we can keep them off the deck we're in good shape. In the past water cannons have been used, then the pirates got RPG's. The pirates have little interest in blowing up the ship, there is no ransom paid if the ship is lost.

Once the pirates are onboard our crews are instructed not to resist. That's the standard. Hit the alarm as they get onboard and cooperate.

In this case the pirates have gotten greedy. Prior to last week few people realized that there are currently 11 other ships detained by pirates and that ransom payments are paid by the shipowners, it is part of the current cost of doing business. Now that the pirates took a VLCC it has been a front page news story for a week.

In the past when pirates got too out of hand organized navies went out and dispatched them. This is going to start happening now.

From the shipowner side because a large area is now considered a piracy zone we can exclude it from our routes. The largest Norwegian shipowner declared they will no longer use the Suez Canal and a few others are following suit.

Financially for us it is a wash, the ships get paid a daily rate and there is no lay-time between voyages. It makes no difference if the voyage is 20 or 30 days, on the 21st or 31st day we're on hire for the next voyage. If we go somewhere we know we are coming back dry this is factored into the voyage rate and the round trip is considered one voyage.

By dropping the Suez it takes longer to deliver the product. That tanker had approximately 24% of Saudi Arabia's daily crude output onboard and by going around that cargo will take longer to reach the refineries.

To the consumer this means that in a given period less product can be delivered leading to tighter supplies. Unless demand also decreases prices go up.

In the sort term there are some security measures being explored by shipowners but for obvious reason I can't discuss.

- Rob Nye
Proud to move Oil

ps: Anyone who thinks we've got tankers running around the ocean on autopilot with an unmanned bridge is talking out there anal arpature.

[KGT1200]

NPR had a story yesterdy of a company who will supply for a cost, three men who "are well practiced in the art of non-lethal defense" for large mechant ships. The claim of this guy is that these guys, with their expertise on water cannons, expertise on barbwire barricades, and other non-lethal defense tactics have a great track record of deterring thee "pirates", and have been doing it for a long time with success. Apparently, when the "pirates" see the line of defense, they chose to hit the next ship (duck) in the water, instead of fight with these goons.

A big deal was made in the interview that these guys have no guns, (I think for the reasons listed in Robs post) and act as a front line defense for the ships that apparently is good enough that "pirates" are deterred from doing their thing....

[aaaaaa]

Think of a toll road. Carry cash on the tanker and pay them off on the spot. Just another tax.
robert

[From MARS]

Well ...... why do you suppose they call it the "Indian Ocean?"

"Cause after the first group of guys sailed across that expanse of water, they were sitting in a bar telling the story, and when they finished, one of them said, "In the end, it was bigger than we thought." For years, it was known as the In the End Ocean, but over time, that has been bastardized to the current Indian Ocean.

Now you know the rest of the story!:bottle

Tom

[Rob Nye]

Think of a toll road. Carry cash on the tanker and pay them off on the spot. Just another tax.
robert

That's what used to happen and still does in the South China Sea.

Most ships are carrying between 10 and 100k in usd in the safe. Pirates would get onboard, force the master to open the safe and then leave with the cash.

That's because they didn't have a friendly port to take the ship to.

In the old days the friendly harbor would be put under blockade, a bunch of people would be killed with no mercy and the problem would go away.

[Mika]

Well ...... why do you suppose they call it the "Indian Ocean?"

Here I thought it was called the Indian Ocean because Madgascarian Ocean was to hard to say, the Seychelles were to small to afford a good press agent and were going for niche resort market while the Australian’s were still on probation at the time and could not legally apply for the copyright on until the done with that.

:bolt

[Rob Nye]

Here I thought it was called the Indian Ocean because Madgascarian Ocean was to hard to say, the Seychelles were to small to afford a good press agent and were going for niche resort market while the Australian’s were still on probation at the time and could not legally apply for the copyright on until the done with that.

:bolt

:laugh

[Motorcyclist]

In the old days the friendly harbor would be put under blockade, a bunch of people would be killed with no mercy and the problem would go away.

I hope that option is high on the current list of considerations. What amazes me is that it must take some infrastructure in the "friendly harbor" to offload cargo, maintain the ships, etc. A blockade and some airpower would do wonders to persuade the surviving pirates to prey stay closer to home.

Sucks if you're a captured mariner when the planes come in, but those are the perils of the job I reckon.

[Rob Nye]

I hope that option is high on the current list of considerations. What amazes me is that it must take some infrastructure in the "friendly harbor" to offload cargo, maintain the ships, etc. A blockade and some airpower would do wonders to persuade the surviving pirates to prey stay closer to home.

Sucks if you're a captured mariner when the planes come in, but those are the perils of the job I reckon.

There is no friendly harbor to offload 2 million barrels of crude. In this case the friendly harbor is the anchorage.

Actually part of the point of merchant vessels being unarmed is so they are not targeted as enemy combatants. While fire, critical injury and drowning could be considered "part of the job" getting killed by gun fire isn't.

[bunkyone]

Hey all; A M-2 .50 cal machine gun has an effective range far beyond 300 meters. A100,000 ton tanker would provide a very stable gun platform. For that matter, arming security personnel with something like a TOW or some other anti-tank round would even the odds nicely.. Could be good duty for any retired grunts out there?! Vaya con Dios, Dutch (By the way, I intend to lift a cold one for the Indian navy later today at the VFW.)