Indian Navy and International Anti-Piracy Ops

nits · Post by **nits** » 14 Mar 2011 21:49

^^^ some how i feel Pirates are getting some sort of assistance from Chinese and Paki Navy in recent times and motive is to keep IN busy... may be my imagination but this can be a likely scenario...

Also i have never heard of a Chines or Paki Ship being captured by Pirates...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 14 Mar 2011 21:52

I don't know about the Chinese, but the only time the Pakistanis get their ships into the open sea is when Unkil gives them the nod. Secondly, even pirates have standards.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Mar 2011 22:00

nits-ji, dem pirates are keeping several navies busy, not just ours

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 14 Mar 2011 22:51

Kailash wrote:Indian Navy arrests 61 pirates, rescues 13 sailors

So the Indian Navy and all the International Naval forces keep "arresting" Pirates; giving them a comfortable jail cell and supplying them with 3 square meals for no work, while they kill innocent civilians and take women and children hostage feeding them bread and water for weeks ?? No wonder we are failing miserably! We should at the very least be selling the organs of these pirates and make them work so that we can recoup the financial losses of running this huge naval operation and rise in insurance premiums that world shipping is facing!

The only solution to this situation is death for piracy. Every single pirate should be killed on sight or killed at sea and thrown as food for fishes. Pirate financiers should be bombed and anybody selling these savages boats or fuel or ammunition should be killed as well as pirate enablers. In the age of sail piracy was defeated at the end of a sword or a musket, not with courts and lawyers. Once people stop coming back from piracy runs and corpses wash ashore Somalia, piracy will end as if magic. Death is the best deterrent.

nits · Post by **nits** » 14 Mar 2011 22:52

Agreed. But recently they are operating very close to India shores and this lets to my imaginations of paki angle...

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 14 Mar 2011 22:57

mughals used to blast pirates from cannons

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 15 Mar 2011 10:52

Pirates nabbed by the Navy in the Arabian Sea being brought on warship INS Tabar to Mumbai. Photo courtesy: Indian Navy

More photos: The Hindu

Prabu · Post by **Prabu** » 15 Mar 2011 13:22

Very good job done ! Kudos to Indian Navy ! Thanks for the picture.

Brando · Post by **Brando** » 15 Mar 2011 13:24

Apparently the International Anti-piracy Operation is taken so lightly by the Pirates that they are now making threats:

Somali Pirates Threaten Indian Government and Indian Sailors in response to Indian Navy Operation

nits · Post by **nits** » 16 Mar 2011 13:32

Navy allowed to engage hijacked ships with Indians

The government gave a go-ahead to the navy on Tuesday to storm hijacked ships carrying Indians or Indian cargo.
The green signal comes even as the navy considers armed guards, akin to sky marshals, aboard merchant ships, to thwart hijack attempts. A final decision in this regard, however, rests with the ministries of defence, law and shipping.

Armed guards aboard merchant ships are not permitted by most countries, but of late Yemen and Malta have allowed the security measure considering the high rate of piracy on the high seas.

In cases where an Indian ship is carrying foreign crew and cargo, or a mix of Indian and foreign crew and cargo, standard operating procedures will be followed, the sources said.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Mar 2011 16:29

Brando wrote:Apparently the International Anti-piracy Operation is taken so lightly by the Pirates that they are now making threats:

Somali Pirates Threaten Indian Government and Indian Sailors in response to Indian Navy Operation

The only way ragtag pirates can find out the nationalities of ships and sailors for "targeted" attacks is by receiving help from a state agency such as the Pakistan Navy.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 16 Mar 2011 17:26

^^^ they get info from ship brokers and others in the industry
it is a large scale organised crime
we may find 'PN' involvement in the scam at various levels - you know what i mean

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 27 Mar 2011 15:54

Indian Navy and Coast Guard Thwart piracy attempt under ‘Operation Island Watch'

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 27 Mar 2011 23:43

chackojoseph wrote:Indian Navy and Coast Guard Thwart piracy attempt under ‘Operation Island Watch'

Navy's investment in patrol vessels has held good in counter piracy operations. Sukanya and Car Nicobar class ships are sufficiently armed to deal with pirates.

Let's see if we get some pictures from this incident: is Suvarna still equipped with Dhanush launcher?

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 28 Mar 2011 06:40

This softpedaling by world powers on piracy is disgusting. What reason is there to conduct elaborate criminal trials for a crime like this? Piracy is looked on as a respectable career option in Somalia. What does that say about the risks associated with the profession? That they're not nearly high enough, perhaps?

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 28 Mar 2011 08:07

UBanerjee wrote:This softpedaling by world powers on piracy is disgusting. What reason is there to conduct elaborate criminal trials for a crime like this? Piracy is looked on as a respectable career option in Somalia. What does that say about the risks associated with the profession? That they're not nearly high enough, perhaps?

Won't help.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 28 Mar 2011 17:13

UBanerjee wrote:This softpedaling by world powers on piracy is disgusting. What reason is there to conduct elaborate criminal trials for a crime like this?

World powers are concerned I am sure - given that the oil supply that flows from that area. However, there are no easy solutions to the Piracy problem. Piracy is only a symptom of the larger trouble in Somalia. Previous attempts to stabilize the country did not work. A reasonable question to ask will be: "What more should India do?"

Secondly, a trial is must. Blowing up pirate boats indiscriminately will turn us killers of innocent hostages which are often held in the mothership.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Mar 2011 08:57

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/ ... 7823.shtml
India captures 16 pirates after 3-hour battle
Indian navy also rescues 16 crew members held hostage by pirates who had taken trawler off Indian coast

AP) NEW DELHI - India's navy and coast guard have captured 16 Somali pirates after a three-hour-long battle in the Arabian Sea, a navy spokesman said Monday.Also, 16 crew members who had been taken hostage by the pirates were rescued from the hijacked Iranian trawler off India's western Lakshadweep islands on Sunday, Captain Manohar Nambiar said.The pirates were using the trawler as a roving pirate base to launch attacks on passing vessels in the Indian Ocean, he said.The pirates were trying to seize a merchant ship, MV Maersk Kensington, when a coast guard vessel and an Indian naval ship picked up its distress signals and went to its aid.The pirates opened fire at the coast guard ship as it drew near, triggering a battle during which the pirate trawler caught fire. The pirates and the hostages, picked up from the sea by the navy ship, were headed for Mumbai.Of the 16 hostages, 12 are Iranians and four are Pakistanis, the navy spokesman said."The pirates will be handed over to the Mumbai police for prosecution. The crew members will be questioned to establish their credentials and then handed over to their embassy officials," Nambiar said.The Indian navy has seized around 120 pirates, mostly from Somalia, over the past few months. Two weeks ago, the navy captured 61 pirates when they attacked a naval ship.Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 31 Mar 2011 08:59

x-post from Future threats thread:

Arya Sumantra wrote:

Pranav wrote:First the navy. It is clear that surface ships have limited utility against a modern enemy. Aircraft carriers are basically floating targets.

The logical thing would be to go easy on the aircraft carriers etc, but develop a force of at least 100 submarines.

A carrier is modern day equivalent of Ashwamegh horse. A symbol of challenge and might and whoever challenges it's free movement has to fight the powerful state. If the carrier has to change course because some countries would not allow it to pass through their waters in narrow regions then the symbol itself has already been defeated. A rush towards symbol first without having a fearsome and menacing submarine fleet is ridiculous to say the least. Symbols of might can always be embarrassed by the more effective subs. Where then shall we hide our face? In WW2, the german leader of uboats wanted 300 uboats and got only 52. But in this day and age and with such a long coastline we seem content with <20 of them is disheartening.

Even the ships being proposed nowadays increasingly appear like surfaced subs (eg DDG Zumwalt). Take out the canon and helipad and you have no reason to keep a naval vessel constrained to remain on surface when a sub carrying the same load of missiles and covered sensors could do the job. The future is subs and not fat targets.

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 Mar 2011 09:39

Prem wrote:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/ ... 7823.shtml
India captures 16 pirates after 3-hour battle
Indian navy also rescues 16 crew members held hostage by pirates who had taken trawler off Indian coast
AP) NEW DELHI - India's navy and coast guard ha....ded over to the Mumbai police for prosecution. The crew members will be questioned to establish their credentials and then handed over to their embassy officials," Nambiar said.The Indian navy has seized around 120 pirates, mostly from Somalia, over the past few months. Two weeks ago, the navy captured 61 pirates when they attacked a naval ship.Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy

More had happened. The pirates tricked Indian Navy into believing that they were surrendring by asking hostages to stand up with their hands up. When IN personnel got near them, the pirates began firing. IN had to sink all their smaller vessels and only after did the pirates surrender.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 31 Mar 2011 09:52

Pranav wrote:x-post from Future threats thread:

Arya Sumantra wrote:

Pranav wrote:First the navy. It is clear that surface ships have limited utility against a modern enemy. Aircraft carriers are basically floating targets.

The logical thing would be to go easy on the aircraft carriers etc, but develop a force of at least 100 submarines.
A carrier is modern day equivalent of Ashwamegh horse. A symbol of challenge and might and whoever challenges it's free movement has to fight the powerful state. If the carrier has to change course because some countries would not allow it to pass through their waters in narrow regions then the symbol itself has already been defeated. A rush towards symbol first without having a fearsome and menacing submarine fleet is ridiculous to say the least. Symbols of might can always be embarrassed by the more effective subs. Where then shall we hide our face? In WW2, the german leader of uboats wanted 300 uboats and got only 52. But in this day and age and with such a long coastline we seem content with <20 of them is disheartening.

Even the ships being proposed nowadays increasingly appear like surfaced subs (eg DDG Zumwalt). Take out the canon and helipad and you have no reason to keep a naval vessel constrained to remain on surface when a sub carrying the same load of missiles and covered sensors could do the job. The future is subs and not fat targets.

the bolded part is on the spot. Carriers are still good tools for intimidation and power projection, but without being backed by subs and a network of other combat ships, a carrier is useless. there is a reason why a typical USN Carrier Battle group consists of Carrier + frigates, cruisers, destroyers and usually also a sub. and the advent of anti-ship ballistic missiles might damn well make the entire concept of having a Carrier behemoth outdated b/c of the huge costs imposed to guard against ASBM's (if that can even be done; till now, no such development).

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Mar 2011 10:30

both.are.needed.

each can do things the other cannot do well.

sub is better at operating against more powerful enemies, spying, laying mines, surprise attacks
carrier is invaluable in protecting trade routes from air threats, launching heavy A2G and ASM attacks enmasse (sub can launch a few SLCM before having to head back for reloads), chasing away subs with ASW helis, command center for expeditionary ops

eg a couple of carriers could dominate the airspace near malacca and myanmar and search for chinese subs. our subs could push further ahead into the indonesia straits to ambush chinese subs , and into south china sea to ambush chinese ships. if things look good, the carriers push further ahead....

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 31 Mar 2011 10:43

Singha wrote:both.are.needed.

each can do things the other cannot do well.

sub is better at operating against more powerful enemies, spying, laying mines, surprise attacks
carrier is invaluable in protecting trade routes from air threats, launching heavy A2G and ASM attacks enmasse (sub can launch a few SLCM before having to head back for reloads), chasing away subs with ASW helis, command center for expeditionary ops

eg a couple of carriers could dominate the airspace near malacca and myanmar and search for chinese subs. our subs could push further ahead into the indonesia straits to ambush chinese subs , and into south china sea to ambush chinese ships. if things look good, the carriers push further ahead....

What would a carrier near Malacca do, if a Chinese sub were to launch a Brahmos-class missile (e.g. Yakhont) from 200 km away?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Mar 2011 10:47

whatever a US CVN would do under same circumstances....shoot it down, decoy it, send powerful ASW helis to scour the area (if not already), .... its presence itself would be a deterrent against PLANAF assets raiding our shipping routes or andamans.

your post is quite despondent in tone, as if brahmos has made carriers obsolete overnight - its never that way. USSR has more powerful missiles and the assets to shoot a lot of them for decades but the US still continued building CVNs @ $5 bil each.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 31 Mar 2011 10:52

Singha wrote:whatever a US CVN would do under same circumstances....shoot it down, decoy it, send powerful ASW helis to scour the area (if not already), .... its presence itself would be a deterrent against PLANAF assets raiding our shipping routes or andamans.

your post is quite despondent in tone, as if brahmos has made carriers obsolete overnight - its never that way.

Well, in a contest between a sub-launched maneuverable Brahmos, launched from 200 km away, and an aircraft carrier, my money would be on the sub.

Bear in mind also that solid fuel missiles could easily go faster than the Mach 2.8 Brahmos.

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 31 Mar 2011 11:13

Pranav wrote:Well, in a contest between a sub-launched maneuverable Brahmos, launched from 200 km away, and an aircraft carrier, my money would be on the sub.

Bear in mind also that solid fuel missiles could easily go faster than the Mach 2.8 Brahmos.

Pranav, by the same logic a ground airfield is obsolete too as it can be hit by cruise & ballistic missiles to render it out of operation. But that is not the case is it. Also by your logic, what would you do if the same sub launches the missiles on your shore establishment like
naval bases, offshore rigs etc. would you stop making them too. In fact the same sub can launch missile on any of your ship 200 km away.Well we might as well pack up the navy right. No Wrong. what needs to be done is layered defense. Keep the sub at bay and look for it and destroy.

I concur with you that the carrier is a huge and very expensive beast to build and operate. However I still feel that it has not been rendered obsolete, for the simple fact being that aircraft's still have one of the most prominent, if not the most prominant, place in modern warfare. So capability to launch and recover fighters is a must have if you can afford it. However, the same capability needs to be protected, just as a airfield is protected, by layered defense. CAPS, ships and subs ahead of the main battle fleet for screening.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 31 Mar 2011 12:09

bmallick wrote: Pranav, by the same logic a ground airfield is obsolete too as it can be hit by cruise & ballistic missiles to render it out of operation. But that is not the case is it. Also by your logic, what would you do if the same sub launches the missiles on your shore establishment like
naval bases, offshore rigs etc. would you stop making them too. In fact the same sub can launch missile on any of your ship 200 km away.Well we might as well pack up the navy right. No Wrong. what needs to be done is layered defense. Keep the sub at bay and look for it and destroy.

I concur with you that the carrier is a huge and very expensive beast to build and operate. However I still feel that it has not been rendered obsolete, for the simple fact being that aircraft's still have one of the most prominent, if not the most prominant, place in modern warfare. So capability to launch and recover fighters is a must have if you can afford it. However, the same capability needs to be protected, just as a airfield is protected, by layered defense. CAPS, ships and subs ahead of the main battle fleet for screening.

Well, a ground airfield cannot sink.

But yes, ground airfields are also vulnerable. Often, in wartime, aircraft are hidden away, and highways are used as impromptu runways.

I'm not saying surface ships are totally useless. But I would say that the number of submarines should be more than the number of surface ships.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 31 Mar 2011 12:21

Singha wrote: USSR has more powerful missiles and the assets to shoot a lot of them for decades but the US still continued building CVNs @ $5 bil each.

That USSR has powerful missiles does not help make small fries like Libya and Iraq any less vulnerable so their CVN investment has helped them.

The problem is more with the order of priority i.e. going for carriers before sporting triple digit number of subs

bmallick · Post by **bmallick** » 31 Mar 2011 12:28

Pranav wrote: I'm not saying surface ships are totally useless. But I would say that the number of submarines should be more than the number of surface ships.

Totally agree with you on this, that the number of subs in our inventory should be increased substantially. Subs definitely are going to be one of the premier weapon systems of any future conflicts. I guess the reason for our small sub numbers was due to us being Pak centric, where by the main war would be on land and not sea. Whereas from China point of view, our greatest gambit should be for choking the chinese trade from sea. Rather than going to violent and decisive land and air war, how about maintaining a defensive posture and go for the long haul. Control the seas and ensure that an economy highly dependent on imports of raw material and export of finished products is slowly squeezed to death. That's where large number of MPA's and AIP equipped subs would come to the fore. Please not that I am saying AIP equipped subs as nuclear subs are far more expensive and we can make up the numbers with cheaper conventional subs.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Apr 2011 04:30

In the latest issue of Vayu, there is an excellent write-up on the recent anti-piracy operations by IN & ICG which nuetralized the two Somali mother ships.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 12 Apr 2011 10:38

If carriers are obsolete, why is everyone building more of them now than for the past several decades?

A decade from now more nations will field carrier-based navies than any time since WW2. More actually (China, India, US, UK/France will have one or two each depending on the fate of the QEs). Both shore-launched and sub-launched missiles still face the significant task of locating and tracking the carrier very exactly, which is especially harder away from shore. And anti-missile defenses already travel with US CVNs and will get more sophisticated even as the missiles get faster and more accurate.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Apr 2011 10:50

SSridhar wrote:In the latest issue of Vayu, there is an excellent write-up on the recent anti-piracy operations by IN & ICG which nuetralized the two Somali mother ships.

Yeah I read that. One story was that they IN ship fired just one 30 mm round across the bows of the pirate vessel and they replied with small arms fire. So the IN ship fired one more 30 mm round and set the damn pirate vessel on fire and all pirates and hostages jumped overboard. The hostages were picked up but the pirates left in lifeboats (due to lack of space) and were picked up later by another ship.

I guess that the only thing smaller than 30 mm on that ship would have been the captain's revolver.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Apr 2011 13:27

well they usually carry the IA LMG on stands...but that wont scare these pirates.

the USN taking its "badass" rep seriously mounts a more elaborate gatling gun in similar role..same one as used as helicopter door guns.

they are conducting tests using 15kw laser to disable small boats
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/04 ... p-on-fire/

the Adm in charge says in last line that he wants a Mw death ray laser.

tsarkar · Post by **tsarkar** » 14 Apr 2011 17:15

^^ The BMP cannon on these ships have dual feed of armour piercing tracer (APT) & AP incendiary (API). I believe a tracer round was first fired as a visible warning and an API next. Incendiary round is hot enough to melt metal & set fuel/ammo on fire.

Its a matter of using the right degree of firepower

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 15 Apr 2011 01:53

Is the Vayu article available online?

Don · Post by **Don** » 15 Apr 2011 22:24

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110415/ap_on_re_af/piracy

Somali pirates keep Indian hostages after ransom

By ABDI GULED and KATHARINE HOURELD, Associated Press Abdi Guled And Katharine Houreld, Associated Press – 44 mins ago

MOGADISHU, Somalia – In a move that could change the pirate-hostage equation, Somali pirates on Friday took in a multimillion dollar ransom, then released the ship and some of the crew but kept all the Indian crew members as hostages.

A pirate told The Associated Press the Indian crew members' hostage ordeal is being prolonged in retaliation for the arrests of more than 100 Somali pirates by the Indian Navy.

"We decided to keep the Indian because India is holding our colleagues," the pirate, Hassan Farah, said. "We released the other crew members who sailed away from our coast. We will keep these Indians until the Indians release our colleagues."

Farah said the pirates in the stronghold of Haradhere have taken that collective decision. The Indian hostages are to be moved to land.

A multimillion dollar ransom was paid for the ship Asphalt Venture, whose ownership is located in Mumbai, India. Pirates are receiving an average of $5 million to release ships and crew, and a ransom in that ballpark was believed to have been paid on Friday.

It wasn't immediately clear how many of the 15 crew members aboard the Asphalt Venture were Indian. The ship was hijacked in late September.

Friday's pirate action marks a major departure from the standard pirate business model of release-for-ransom and could complicate international military efforts against the piracy trade.

Earlier this year pirates killed four American hostages while U.S. Navy warships were shadowing the hijacked yacht, the first time pirates had done that.

Overall, analysts say pirates are becoming increasingly aggressive, violent and hostile.

The Indian navy has seized around 120 pirates, mostly from Somalia, over the past few months. Last month the Indian navy captured 61 pirates when they attacked a naval ship. Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy surveillance in the Indian Ocean area since 2008.

Piracy has long plagued the shipping industry off East Africa, but violence has escalated in recent months. Pirates held some 30 ships and more than 600 hostages

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Apr 2011 23:01

maybe going in their in a old fashioned way and killing everyone in a couple of coastal pirate towns is only way to send a message? or drone target the high end cars moving in that region and seaside manstions which would surely be pirate lords.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 16 Apr 2011 00:56

Don wrote:....A pirate told The Associated Press the Indian crew members' hostage ordeal is being prolonged in retaliation for the arrests of more than 100 Somali pirates by the Indian Navy.

"We decided to keep the Indian because India is holding our colleagues," the pirate, Hassan Farah, said. "We released the other crew members who sailed away from our coast. We will keep these Indians until the Indians release our colleagues."

Farah said the pirates in the stronghold of Haradhere have taken that collective decision. The Indian hostages are to be moved to land

...

This is a serious development. I consider this as a direct challenge to the Indian state by the pirates. We must send in the MARCOS to liberate the hostages at sea before they are taken ashore.

I hope the day never comes that India has to negotiate for its citizen's like had to in '99.

jai · Post by **jai** » 16 Apr 2011 05:49

I say grab more and more pirates, then do a hostage exchange for any captured Indians. Once you have the Indians released, give them a very stern warning that you would come after them and kill them if even one Indian was captured thereafter - and do it to let them understand the seriousness of your threat. Park a few ships a few miles from the Somalian coast and sink any pirate boat you come across. Do air strikes against all their strong holds and flatten them down. Do it for six months and you would have knocked out many of their teeth. These guys will never touch another Indian in their lives after that. Better to bomb these pirates than get involved in Libya I say.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Apr 2011 07:16

jai wrote:I say grab more and more pirates, then do a hostage exchange for any captured Indians. Once you have the Indians released, give them a very stern warning that you would come after them and kill them if even one Indian was captured thereafter - and do it to let them understand the seriousness of your threat. Park a few ships a few miles from the Somalian coast and sink any pirate boat you come across. Do air strikes against all their strong holds and flatten them down. Do it for six months and you would have knocked out many of their teeth. These guys will never touch another Indian in their lives after that. Better to bomb these pirates than get involved in Libya I say.

Jai, IC 814 was the last time India did a hostage exchange. A "hostage exchange" demands that we negotiate with hostage takers and that they value their people as much as we do ours. I don't see this as a wise move.

About parking a few ships - I will post two images below. Somalia has a 750 km long coast. If you park a ship 10 km from say the middle - that ship will be 350 plus km away from the Northern or Southern limit of the coast. If you park ships so that they are within striking range of any part of the coast - they will have to be at least 200 -300 km away and there has to be maritime surveillance by air 24/7. Still the Somalis using small stealthy boats may slip though.

Somali bases are like the village pictured below - I had grabbed that image off Google Earth for an earlier discussion about the same topic. The Somalis are like the Taliban - they are spread out in small communities and do not have a central Delhi/Washington/Moscow that you can take out. One needs on the ground intelligence to see what needs to be hit. Even then the pirates will be living among women and children who will definitely get killed leading to howls of protest.

If we have to do this job it has to be done with a plan to bring order to Somalia. Just punishing a few pirates and warning them is not enough. One country tried to "punish" another one in 1962. It will live to regret that.

Click on image.