Indian Navy and International Anti-Piracy Ops

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Gerard » 26 Nov 2008 16:01

Who could have thought that innocent fishing equipment is so combustible?
Must be the fish sauce or other condiments on board...

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Lalmohan » 26 Nov 2008 16:06

Gerard wrote:Who thought that innocent fishing equipment is so combustible


not to mention carrying a HUGE amount of diesel that has cooked off! ;)
too much hanky panky going on

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby harbans » 26 Nov 2008 16:15

The massive esplosion could be the Diesel in fuel tanks exploding.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5838
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Dileep » 26 Nov 2008 16:40

From link posted by harbans
Choong said that naval ships operating independently in the region should make efforts to obtain information on hijacked vessels, and link up with coalition forces to avoid confusion in the future

What is the locus standi for the so called Coalition Forces there? And what the hell right have the Thai govt to call the ambassador. If the ship flies a Kiribati flag, THAT nation alone can do it. It doesn't matter who owns it.

Hariprasad
BRFite
Posts: 247
Joined: 10 Dec 2005 02:00

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Hariprasad » 26 Nov 2008 16:57

Dileep wrote:From link posted by harbans
Choong said that naval ships operating independently in the region should make efforts to obtain information on hijacked vessels, and link up with coalition forces to avoid confusion in the future

What is the locus standi for the so called Coalition Forces there? And what the hell right have the Thai govt to call the ambassador. If the ship flies a Kiribati flag, THAT nation alone can do it. It doesn't matter who owns it.


Also this is the same Coalition Force which refused to come to the aid of an Indian merchant vessel in distress, after it conveyed that it was flying an Indian flag.

The IN did exactly what it was supposed to do in the international waters period.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2008 17:13

Absolutely,the Thai ambassador should be called and questioned about Thailand harbouring terrorists and terror organisations like the LTTE,etc.,whose henchmen are wanted by various nations.Here are details on how the Thais have secretly allowed its soil to be used as torture camps for US rendition victims.Thai leaders and their military have long been lackeys of the US.The Thais have become the mouthpiece for other impotent naval forces!

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/t ... ?id=125235
Friday January 18, 2008 07:42

Tortured in Thailand

Washington - Destroyed CIA videotapes show the water-boarding of two suspected al-Qaeda leaders at secret CIA interrogations in Thailand during 2002, a US congressional hearing has heard.

Thai authorities have long denied the existence of the so-called prison in Thailand - apparently on the narrow interpretation of the description of the facility.

It has long been well known that US agents removed several senior terrorist suspects from Pakistan and Afghanistan to Thailand for initial interrogation.

Thaksin Shinawatra, the prime minister at the time of the interrogations, has always denied that there was any CIA "base" or "prison" in Thailand. Foreign sources have told the Bangkok Post that the denials were technically correct.

The interrogations - or torture - of al-Qaeda suspects was carried out at so-called safe houses on a military base in Thailand, the sources said.

The CIA didn't reveal the existence of the tapes, nor their destruction, until 2005.

"It smells like a coverup, but the question is whether it was illegal or not," an anonymous source familiar with the House hearing told the Washington Post newspaper, which carried no details of the so-called prison in Thailand.

"The presence of the tapes in Bangkok and the CIA's communications with the station chief there were described by current and former officials," it said.


Sources in Thailand have confirmed to Bangkokpost.com the following interrogations:

Abu Zubaida, detained on March 28, 2002, was the first Osama bin Laden henchman captured after the 2001 terrorist attacks on the US. He was wounded in a firefight in Pakistan when he was brought to Thailand, according to well-placed sources. At a warehouse on an airbase, Zubaida received both treatment for wounds - and harsh questioning, including being placed in a cold room with ear-splitting, loud music. According to published reports, Zubaida received the so-called water-boarding interrogation, which simulates drowning. The destroyed videotapes reportedly showed that he begged for mercy and began cooperating with interrogators and two American psychologists who participated in the interrogation after 0.31 seconds of water-boarding.

Khaled Sheikh Mohammed was captured by Pakistani security forces in a gunbattle on Sept 11, 2002, escaped, and was recaptured unhurt in Rawlpindi in 2003. He was flown almost immediately to Thailand. He was the mastermind of many attacks worldwide including the September 11, 2001, airline suicide flights in New York and Washington. He was interrogated shortly after his arrival in Thailand, and within one or two seconds of water-boarding agreed to cooperate. Since then, Khaled has been described as a fount of information on al-Qaeda and its worldwide operations, including in Southeast Asia where he set up the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group in the Philippines.

Ramzi bin al-Shibh, another 9/11 planner, was captured in Pakistan in the same Karachi raid as Khaled, in a firefight that took place on the first anniversary of the attacks in the US. He was turned over to Americans, who flew him to Thailand. It is not clear whether his interrogation was videotaped.

No prisoners have been brought to Thailand since 2003, when published reports revealed the use of Thailand for the questionsing, according to reports.

Hambali, the Jemaah Islamiya operations chief captured in Ayutthaya in August of 2003, was whisked out of Thailand for questioning.

According to the Washington Post story, which detailed the destruction of the videotapes, but not their content:

In late 2005, the retiring CIA station chief in Bangkok sent a classified cable to his superiors in Langley asking if he could destroy videotapes recorded at a secret CIA prison in Thailand that in part portrayed intelligence officers using simulated drowning to extract information from suspected al-Qaeda members.

The tapes had been sitting in the station chief's safe, in the US Embassy compound, for nearly three years. Although those involved in the interrogations had pushed for the tapes' destruction in those years and a secret debate about it had twice reached the White House, CIA officials had not acted on those requests. This time was different.


The CIA had a new director and an acting general counsel, neither of whom sought to block the destruction of the tapes, according to agency officials. The station chief was insistent because he was retiring and wanted to resolve the matter before he left, the officials said. And in November 2005, a published report that detailed a secret CIA prison system provoked an international outcry.

Those three circumstances pushed the CIA's then-director of clandestine operations, Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., to act against the earlier advice of at least five senior CIA and White House officials, who had counseled the agency since 2003 that the tapes should be preserved. Rodriguez consulted CIA lawyers and officials, who told him that he had the legal right to order the destruction. In his view, he received their implicit support to do so, according to his attorney, Robert S. Bennett.



The US House Intelligence Committee criticised the CIA's destruction of videotapes showing the harsh interrogation tactics of detainees at secret prisons, notably the one in Thailand. Members heard testimony from the CIA's acting general counsel, John Rizzo, in a closed hearing Wednesday.


The committee chairman, Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, said he was convinced the CIA skirted its duties to report to congressional oversight members regarding the tapes and their destruction, according to a story in The Washington Post newspaper.


House member Peter Hoekstra said Rizzo testified that the CIA's head of clandestine services, Jose Rodriquez Jr, acted autonomously when he ordered the tapes destruction in November 2005.


"It appears from what we have seen to date that Rodriguez may not have been following instructions" Hoekstra said.


Rodriquez didn't testify in the hearing, though his lawyer said Rodriquez ordered the destruction of the tapes after CIA lawyers gave their approval, the Post report said. (Compiled by BangkokPost.com)

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20797
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Philip » 26 Nov 2008 17:59

Silly man.All that is needed is some balls and a new ROE for dealing with pirates,especially by destorying their infrastructure on land.The loot and money and the goodies that it buys,as seen from the pirates' opulent living standards,have to be on land.Pirates obey no laws,therefore no laws should protect them.

Arrrggh!!! Pirates (And The Law)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/ ... 8243.shtml

There Be Brigands On The High Seas, And Maritime Law Is Pretty Helpless To Stop Them

Ransom In Hand, Pirates Free Tanker, Crew
2008 Somali Pirate Haul: $150M + Benefits


(CBS) Attorney Andrew Cohen analyzes legal issues for CBS News and CBSNews.com.

Jon Stewart’s hilarious parody aside, there is nothing funny about what is happening to those poor commercial sailors in the Gulf of Aden. They are being attacked with alarming frequency by modern-era pirates.

Just take a glance at the Weekly Piracy Report from the International Chamber of Commerce - dozens and dozens of attacks this year - and you know that last week’s news boomlet about brigands isn’t just your typical post-election shark-like hype.

Beyond the jokes and the stereotypes, beyond the terror and the hostages, there is a swirling, circular legal canopy caused by the new rise in piracy, and on it is written a series of diplomatic, military and political disputes stirring angst among vast shipping enterprises, huge insurance companies, and various naval forces in that under-noticed area of the world.

Don’t laugh - those missile-packing gunmen in their creepy leisure wear are going to have an impact on your wallet.

I remember two things about international law from law school. The first is that my professor looked like the captain of the Titanic or Sean Connery circa “The Hunt for Red October.”

The second is that international law very rarely provides an easy or quick solution to disputes that having anything to do with what are still known as the "High Seas." For those of you new to Piracy Law, High Seas are open waters beyond the legal and territorial jurisdiction of any country. They are supposed to be free to all whom come for peaceful and legal reasons.

The shipping and insurance companies, naturally, want the U.S. or Indian navies to increase their presence in the Gulf, ward off the pirates, and protect valuable shipping lanes. Otherwise, they say, they’ll have to hire security guards, increase their own patrols, and ultimately force those new costs down to their customers.

The insurance companies, meanwhile, are talking about increasing the size of the “war-risk zone” to include that area. That would mean higher insurance premiums for the companies running their vessels through the Gulf. And guess where high premiums ultimately end up?

The governments involved, including ours, have been sympathetic but not terribly aggressive. The Associated Press reported last week that a “multicoalition naval force has increased patrols in the region,” and an Indian naval vessel actually sank a suspected pirate ship last Wednesday.

But the AP also reports that 21,000 ships pass through the Gulf every year and that the U.S. Navy concedes that it does not have the assets to “be everywhere with every single ship.” A little over two hundred years after our big battle with the so-called Barbary Pirates, we are not quite ready to open up a new front against “terrorism” of a different sort.

And no one can really make us. Nothing in international law requires a nation to protect private interests beyond territorial waters. The “norm” around the world does not force governments to spend military assets acting as Sheriff of the High Seas. These robbers, the ones hijacking oil tankers, are robbing in a jurisdiction more like the Frontier West, where marshals were scarce and posses only sometimes got their man.

I don’t see our military leaders deciding anytime soon to make anti-piracy a tactical priority. I don’t see President Obama declaring war on African pirates to protect Chinese shipping companies.

So what’s going to happen? In the short run, things will continue to be a mess. The companies are going to better protect their vessels - at a reported cost of roughly $60,000 per journey. There are going to be “private” battles between the pirates and mercenaries hired by the shipping companies. There will be political and diplomatic pressure brought to bear upon cash-starved Egypt, which charges $200,000 per vessel for access to the Suez Canal.

There will be pressure placed upon chaotic Somalia, too, which by all accounts is the root cause of the tide of piracy. But the piracy will continue. People will be killed. The Indian and American navies will continue to score the occasional take-down of a pirate ship. The insurance industry will push to expand that war-risk zone so it can charge higher rates. And there will be dense, technical, maritime-type lawsuits - wave after wave of them - until some sort of calm returns to the Gulf of Aden.

Let me put it this way: If you are wondering what Johnny Depp’s next project will look like, think “Jack Sparrow” meets “The Verdict” and you may have a good idea. And it might also be a good idea to know when “Talk Like a Pirate Day” is.


By Andrew Cohen
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Comments [ + Post Your Own ]

Now you're in the public comment zone. What follows is not CBS News stuff; it comes from other people and we don't vouch for it. A reminder: By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

stevador39,

Ausus is not a lobbyist for anyone. He is a former journalist and newspaper editor who has traveled widely and would not want to be on a ship captured by pirates. As a journalist, he remembers when terrorists boarded a cruise ship and killed one of the passengers who happened to be a US citizen.

Of course the answer to avoid pirates is to abandon ships and freight everything by air. Of course it would make a nasty carbon footprint.

Posted by ausus at 10:42 PM : Nov 24, 2008
+ report abuse
Gee sombody else asking for a government bailout. Hell we might as well bail the shipping company''s out, we bailed out the pirates on wall street.


Posted by jsd330 at 09:46 PM : Nov 24, 2008
+ report abuse
Take a squadron of fighter jets up and down the Somalia coastline. Blow everything out of the water that floats. Go back a few days later to get the ones we missed. Purge Somalia of floating vessels on a weekly basis for a few months and we will get rid of the pirates. If the local population can''t fish for a while maybe the pirates won''t have that Robin Hood appeal anymore.


Posted by emperorlotku at 09:26 AM : Nov 24, 2008
+ report abuse
So why dont they just stay within 12 nautical miles of the shore and make it a problem for the sovereign nation whose waters they are traveling through?


Posted by gmcnally2 at 09:19 AM : Nov 24, 2008
+ report abuse
Unless I miss my guess, the old policy (read: 17-19th century) regarding piracy on the high seas was also to let the private companies handle defense of their shipping against pirate attacks, but they still had to deliver any pirates captured alive to their governments for trial. Of course, for those pirates who survived to be tried, a government charge of piracy usually implied a death sentence anyway.

As far as I know those laws are mostly still in place, so maybe if we''re lucky we will see dead pirates hanging from Boston Common soon. One can only hope.

Enjoy this!

Shippers urge naval blockade of Somali coast http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/11/ ... Piracy.php

NATO not considering Somali naval blockade
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... qKfkSgks4A

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Gerard » 26 Nov 2008 18:43

harbans wrote:The massive esplosion could be the Diesel in fuel tanks exploding.


Petrol tanks explode like that. I don't believe that happens with diesel.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Lalmohan » 26 Nov 2008 18:56

Gerard wrote:
harbans wrote:The massive esplosion could be the Diesel in fuel tanks exploding.


Petrol tanks explode like that. I don't believe that happens with diesel.


indeed, diesel is much more passive and fairly hard to ignite - fireball explosions not so easy

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby shiv » 26 Nov 2008 19:09

chetak wrote:Great!
Check this out.

http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/26/top16.htm


Pakistan offers UN help to combat high sea piracy


Thsi would be easy.

All they have to do is keep their ships (the ones that float that is) to stay in port for a few months and piracy will come down.

deovratsingh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 02 Nov 2006 07:11
Location: USA

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby deovratsingh » 26 Nov 2008 19:58

They are the biggest pirates themselves.

Thanks,

DS.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1966
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby AdityaM » 26 Nov 2008 20:06

sohamn wrote:By the way, I got the torpedo idea from the movie The In-Laws . There Micheal Douglas who was riding a speed boat was chased by a torpedo. So my great idea is - Let a IN submarine lead a destroyer or frigade, while the ship stays a little distance and questions the Mother******* ship on Radio, the sub can creep up close to investigate, it can use periscopes to take photos, or even use the sonars to listen to what the pirates speak. If they can confirm that the ship is hostile then blow it out of the water with a Torpedo. Another advantage is that there will be no evidence left to question IN later


Not at all a great idea!
You wish to invest millions of indian tax payers money on sending a naval flotilla to check on piracy because of this incident?!!
And its preposterous even to suggest that IN should use submarines to sneak & peek & take photos. A very voyeuristic idea!
Last edited by AdityaM on 26 Nov 2008 20:24, edited 1 time in total.

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Bade » 26 Nov 2008 20:18

Why would a fishing trawler be taken over expecting a huge ransom money ? This is the weak link in the story. The trouble is not worth it unless the plan was to use it as a mother ship by the pirates.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22833
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby chetak » 26 Nov 2008 20:50

AdityaM wrote:
sohamn wrote:By the way, I got the torpedo idea from the movie The In-Laws . There Micheal Douglas who was riding a speed boat was chased by a torpedo. So my great idea is - Let a IN submarine lead a destroyer or frigade, while the ship stays a little distance and questions the Mother******* ship on Radio, the sub can creep up close to investigate, it can use periscopes to take photos, or even use the sonars to listen to what the pirates speak. If they can confirm that the ship is hostile then blow it out of the water with a Torpedo. Another advantage is that there will be no evidence left to question IN later


Not at all a great idea!
You wish to invest millions of indian tax payers money on sending a naval flotilla to check on piracy because of this incident?!!
And its preposterous even to suggest that IN should use submarines to sneak & peek & take photos. A very voyeuristic idea!


Sohamn ji

Micheal Douglas and his antics notwithstanding, a torpedo just cannot match the agility of a small speedboat.

Although a tad unconventional, I dare say that a submarine on its own could carry out such a patrol. (just for arguments sake) :)
Why not just take photos using a suitable telephoto lens? Cheaper than using a submarine i am sure. :)
Did Micheal Douglas also put you up to the idea of listening to conversations on pirate boat using the sonar? :)
Maybe we should commission this blighter into the IN pronto! :D

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22833
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby chetak » 26 Nov 2008 20:53

Bade wrote:Why would a fishing trawler be taken over expecting a huge ransom money ? This is the weak link in the story. The trouble is not worth it unless the plan was to use it as a mother ship by the pirates.




Bade ji
This one was a keeper!
They would have used it as a mothership for sure.

SureshP
BRFite
Posts: 256
Joined: 10 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby SureshP » 26 Nov 2008 21:11

Picture taken by INS Tabar of the ship being "destroyed"
Image

Image from Sirichai fisheries
Image

rajrang
BRFite
Posts: 415
Joined: 24 Jul 2006 08:08

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby rajrang » 26 Nov 2008 21:28

Imagine if an Indian civilian ship is taken over by pirates and some navy blows it up after seeing armed pirates on the ship. That would we wrong because innocent civilian hostages would have died.

Similarly, if this was indeed a Thai civilian ship whose innocent crew also died due to the actions of the Indian navy, then India definitely owes an explanation, apology and reasonable compensation.

However, it may take some investigation before the real facts are found out.

Also in future there needs to be a different response mechanism when such a ship with pirates is spotted - to prevent possible civilian casualities. I myself do not have ideas as to how this can be done - after all piracy needs to be stopped.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby ramana » 26 Nov 2008 21:44

I agree with Philip. The Thai trawler was gun running for th pirates. And after being sunk is claiming to be hijacked by the pirates. Gun running would account for the ammo store that seems to have gone up in the blast. A through investigation of the Thai owners will reveal a lot. Look at the map they have at the website - ops in all over the high seas for a small fry Thai company. Could also be intel cover company with a side business of gun running.

harbans, diesel is not detonating type fuel. Thats why ships use diesel oil to reduce the chances of explosions and fire.

Anabhaya
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 20 Sep 2005 12:36

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Anabhaya » 26 Nov 2008 21:56

Thailand is notorious for gun running and arms supplies to militant groups. The LTTE for instance has been observed to have a strong presence in Thailand.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 22:22

rajrang wrote:Imagine if an Indian civilian ship is taken over by pirates and some navy blows it up after seeing armed pirates on the ship. That would we wrong because innocent civilian hostages would have died.

Similarly, if this was indeed a Thai civilian ship whose innocent crew also died due to the actions of the Indian navy, then India definitely owes an explanation, apology and reasonable compensation.

However, it may take some investigation before the real facts are found out.

Also in future there needs to be a different response mechanism when such a ship with pirates is spotted - to prevent possible civilian casualities. I myself do not have ideas as to how this can be done - after all piracy needs to be stopped.


I understand your point, but we should also note that in a war like senario where a flotilla of naval ships are patrolling a region for searching and destroying pirate ships, here comes a ship that looks alike a pirate mother ship, fires back at the naval ship and threatens to blow the naval ship into pieces, what is the naval ship supposed to do? Run away?
For protecting innocent lives Thailand should not send fishing ships to Somalia. What indian navy has done is right and I am proud of IN.

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby PaulJI » 26 Nov 2008 22:26

sohamn wrote:For protecting innocent lives Thailand should not send fishing ships to Somalia. What indian navy has done is right and I am proud of IN.

Thailand does not send fishing boats anywhere. Thai citizens & companies that own fishing boats are free to sail them where they wish. As long as they break no Thai laws, Thailand has no right to prevent them. Thailand is not North Korea.

H.B.Krishna
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 32
Joined: 29 Jun 2007 19:14

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby H.B.Krishna » 26 Nov 2008 22:30

I guess Diesel may not catch fire easily, but has the tendency to explode. That's why usually buses / Lorry catching fire results in causalities...Diesel tank explosion...You give the right pressure and temperature ...and kaboom !!!
Having said that, the near mushroom like explosion in the picture looks like something more halal than diesel.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Singha » 26 Nov 2008 22:30

can anyone tell me why most commercial ships are registered in Liberia?

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 22:31

chetak wrote:
AdityaM wrote:
sohamn wrote:By the way, I got the torpedo idea from the movie The In-Laws . There Micheal Douglas who was riding a speed boat was chased by a torpedo. So my great idea is - Let a IN submarine lead a destroyer or frigade, while the ship stays a little distance and questions the Mother******* ship on Radio, the sub can creep up close to investigate, it can use periscopes to take photos, or even use the sonars to listen to what the pirates speak. If they can confirm that the ship is hostile then blow it out of the water with a Torpedo. Another advantage is that there will be no evidence left to question IN later


Not at all a great idea!
You wish to invest millions of indian tax payers money on sending a naval flotilla to check on piracy because of this incident?!!
And its preposterous even to suggest that IN should use submarines to sneak & peek & take photos. A very voyeuristic idea!


Sohamn ji

Micheal Douglas and his antics notwithstanding, a torpedo just cannot match the agility of a small speedboat.

Although a tad unconventional, I dare say that a submarine on its own could carry out such a patrol. (just for arguments sake) :)
Why not just take photos using a suitable telephoto lens? Cheaper than using a submarine i am sure. :)
Did Micheal Douglas also put you up to the idea of listening to conversations on pirate boat using the sonar? :)
Maybe we should commission this blighter into the IN pronto! :D


I agree it is unconventional, little bit costly but think of the valuable practise. You can argue that sailors can practise in a war game but I think a real life senario would be better I guess. Moreover, when we use a sub we can creep up close and figure out what is going on without disclosing its own location and presence. We can avoid collateral damage.
About the sonar, I think modern sonars are so good that one can even hear what people in nearby boats are speaking. Especially if they are in the decks below the water surface. Anyways, my suggestion is only for argument sake.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 22:35

Singha wrote:can anyone tell me why most commercial ships are registered in Liberia?

just do a search on flag of convenience and you will come to know.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54535
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby ramana » 26 Nov 2008 22:36

Singha wrote:can anyone tell me why most commercial ships are registered in Liberia?

No taxes. Liberia and Panama are flags of convienence.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 22:39

H.B.Krishna wrote:I guess Diesel may not catch fire easily, but has the tendency to explode. That's why usually buses / Lorry catching fire results in causalities...Diesel tank explosion...You give the right pressure and temperature ...and kaboom !!!
Having said that, the near mushroom like explosion in the picture looks like something more halal than diesel.

But I think mere 30 mm fire is not enough for a diesel tank to explode. It would need incendiary rounds or tracer rounds to do the trick. Can some gurus shed light whether the 30 mm guns would have such rounds in an IN ship like Tabar.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Singha » 26 Nov 2008 22:44

beltfed MG guns sometimes have a tracer round every X real rounds to help
in visual aim correction. for a opto-radar CIWS type gun I suppose thats not necessary...but arent the kashtan ammo explosive cannon shells rather than inert DU rounds of phalanx?

british chieftain tank also used a 'ranging MG' that fired tracers and said
to be superior to american opto-electronic systems of the era.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 23:07

PaulJI wrote:
sohamn wrote:For protecting innocent lives Thailand should not send fishing ships to Somalia. What indian navy has done is right and I am proud of IN.

Thailand does not send fishing boats anywhere. Thai citizens & companies that own fishing boats are free to sail them where they wish. As long as they break no Thai laws, Thailand has no right to prevent them. Thailand is not North Korea.


The distance between thailand and somalia is 6207.15 kms.
Speed of a Commercial Fishing Trawler with displacement hull- not more that 12 knots.
No of screws a Trawler has - single screw

Distance a commercial fishing trawler can cover without refuelling or having extra fuel tanks is less than 3000 miles i.e. 4800 kms.
exclusive fishing zone for a country - 200 miles i.e. 320 kms.

So you can infer what a Thai fishing ship was doing near the cost of somalia. Definitely not fishing. I bet it was smuggling weapons or narcotics in somalia. Either it was captured by the opponent pirates or the pirates on board were the ones the goods were intended to be delivered.

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 23:20

Singha wrote:beltfed MG guns sometimes have a tracer round every X real rounds to help
in visual aim correction. for a opto-radar CIWS type gun I suppose thats not necessary...but arent the kashtan ammo explosive cannon shells rather than inert DU rounds of phalanx?

british chieftain tank also used a 'ranging MG' that fired tracers and said
to be superior to american opto-electronic systems of the era.


If you can confirm that the GSh-30k guns are HE shells then it is a different story. Few rounds of those and the trawler will catch fire.

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1966
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby AdityaM » 26 Nov 2008 23:21

sohamn wrote:I agree it is unconventional, little bit costly but think of the valuable practise. You can argue that sailors can practise in a war game but I think a real life senario would be better I guess. Moreover, when we use a sub we can creep up close and figure out what is going on without disclosing its own location and presence. We can avoid collateral damage.


And the Submarine periscope will be customised to rise 50 feet in the air so that it can be eye-level with the ships deck?

AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1966
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby AdityaM » 26 Nov 2008 23:25

sohamn wrote:
Singha wrote:can anyone tell me why most commercial ships are registered in Liberia?

just do a search on flag of convenience and you will come to know.


Even land-locked Mongolia offers "flag of convenience" :rotfl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag ... nience.png

sohamn
BRFite
Posts: 311
Joined: 27 Jul 2006 12:56
Location: the Queen of the Angels of Porziuncola
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby sohamn » 26 Nov 2008 23:28

AdityaM wrote:
sohamn wrote:I agree it is unconventional, little bit costly but think of the valuable practise. You can argue that sailors can practise in a war game but I think a real life senario would be better I guess. Moreover, when we use a sub we can creep up close and figure out what is going on without disclosing its own location and presence. We can avoid collateral damage.


And the Submarine periscope will be customised to rise 50 feet in the air so that it can be eye-level with the ships deck?



Aditya my friend, the periscope need not be raised 50 feet high to see the deck, the submarine merely has to stay 200 feet away from the ship and raise the periscope 5 feet above water to see the deck.

Jagan
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3032
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Earth @ Google.com
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Jagan » 26 Nov 2008 23:46

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7749486.stm

India navy defends piracy sinking

Mr Wicharn said the boat had been headed from Oman to Yemen to deliver fishing equipment when it was approached by the pirates in two speedboats.

The Indian navy mistook the vessel for a pirate "mother ship", he said.

Mr Wicharn said he had learnt the fate of his trawler from a Cambodian crew member who had survived the bombardment and had been rescued by a passing ship after six days adrift in the Indian Ocean.

The sailor was now recovering in a hospital in Yemen, he said.

The survivor said all the crew were tied up except the captain and translator.

Mr Wicharn said the Thai foreign ministry had summoned the Indian ambassador to issue a complaint.


and

The British navy confirmed the boat had been boarded and that any action could harm the crew.

huh??

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby PaulJI » 27 Nov 2008 03:09

sohamn wrote:
PaulJI wrote:
sohamn wrote:For protecting innocent lives Thailand should not send fishing ships to Somalia. What indian navy has done is right and I am proud of IN.

Thailand does not send fishing boats anywhere. Thai citizens & companies that own fishing boats are free to sail them where they wish. As long as they break no Thai laws, Thailand has no right to prevent them. Thailand is not North Korea.


The distance between thailand and somalia is 6207.15 kms.
Speed of a Commercial Fishing Trawler with displacement hull- not more that 12 knots.
No of screws a Trawler has - single screw

Distance a commercial fishing trawler can cover without refuelling or having extra fuel tanks is less than 3000 miles i.e. 4800 kms.
exclusive fishing zone for a country - 200 miles i.e. 320 kms.

So you can infer what a Thai fishing ship was doing near the cost of somalia. Definitely not fishing. I bet it was smuggling weapons or narcotics in somalia. Either it was captured by the opponent pirates or the pirates on board were the ones the goods were intended to be delivered.

Consider these facts . . .
A Thai fishing boat does not have to sail from Thailand to Aden without refuelling, It can buy fuel en route.
A Thai (or any other) fishing boat does not have to sail home with its fish. It can land it at a nearby port, or transfer it to a freezer ship. Both are absolutely normal methods.
It is common - very common - for fishing boats to base themselves in foreign ports nowadays. Taiwanese, Korean, & other fishing boats operate from Port Stanley (Falklands), buying fuel there, having repairs done if necessary, landing their catches for loading onto freighters, & taking advantage of the rather limited (but better than on board their boats) entertainment facilities. They are licenced to fish in Falklands waters by the local government. Other fishing boats operate without such licences, fishing in international waters - such as Thai boats operating out of Yemen or Oman.

This is all pretty standard procedure. It happens all over the world. Boats often stay away from home for long enough that the crews fly home, & new crews are flown out. Try searching online, & you will find all that I have told you, & more. In this context, it is perfectly normal for a boat to be taking equipment from one local port to another. The owners could boats based at more than one local port. Sometimes gear needs moving from one to the other. Routine activity.

[Edit]
Ah - 6 Dec 2005 - MV Sirichai Petroleum 2, a tanker owned by Sirichai fisheries, attacked by pirates off Somalia while en route to deliver fuel to Thai fishing boats. Escaped.

From the website of Sirichai Fisheries -
"MAIN BUSINESS
• Fishing in the EEZ of other countries under licenses and joint venture"

"SUPPORTING BUSINESS
• Transport the marine products by refrigerated trucks and international reefer carriers
...
• Supply activities such as offshore bunkering, provision delivery"
http://www.sirichaifisheries.com/aboutus03.php

In other words, exactly what I said. All of those are normal fishing company activities. Small firms can operate long-range by buying support services from bigger ones, such as Sirichai.
Last edited by PaulJI on 27 Nov 2008 16:20, edited 1 time in total.

niran
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5426
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 16:01

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby niran » 27 Nov 2008 08:35

Looking at the burning ship picture,

The fire is burning furiously at the middle.
isn't that where the "Cargo Hold" should be?

I see the Bridge is at the front.
isn't that where the "fuel tank" should be?

Speaking of Sirichai Fisheries, I remember an episode a couple of decades ago,

In Malacca Strait a pirate speed boat was chased and fired upon by Malaysian Navy,
Three died and were promptly pushed off board. two pirates
escaped by hiding in Coastal Jungle lining these parts.

IDs were found on the dead ones, proclaiming them to be employed
by Sirichai Fishries co.ltd.
3 days later by a huge coincidence, a fire broke out in HR deptarment office.
Although it was put out within 10 mins, no major damage was done, Only
few ledgers containing Employee records was lost.
I remember reading it in the breaking NEWS column(no online version in Thailand then).
next day when I expected to read it in full, no mention of it was to be found.

The point is,
It could have been illegally fishing and captured by Pirates.

It could have been Pirating it self(given the company past lost history)
remember there is a Gap of 4 plus hours between INS Tarbar first challenge
and the sinking. The owners could have informed the so called Anti Piracy
office, waited for the confirmation about crew deaths, and then raised
the din, without any alive crew, their version will be the only version,No?

whatever is the truth, the fact remains, this "Innocent Fishing Trawler" discharged
a military weapon at INS Tarbar. INS Tarbar responded in kind, which is expected of them.

IMO the message is loud and clear, Please do not mess with IN. You might not live to regret it.

PaulJI
BRFite
Posts: 149
Joined: 10 Mar 2007 00:49

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby PaulJI » 27 Nov 2008 16:02

First of all, you should get the sequence of events right. The IMB was informed the vessel had been attacked & probably seized by pirates before the encounter with the INS Tabar.

Also, no nonsense about fish not burning. It wasn't fishing, but en route between Oman & Yemen.

Ajay Pratap - can you supply any supporting evidence for the Malacca Straits story?

The chance that this firm is engaged in illegal fishing is rather high, I'd say, but that doesn't merit the death penalty.

As for this -
whatever is the truth, the fact remains, this "Innocent Fishing Trawler" discharged
a military weapon at INS Tarbar. INS Tarbar responded in kind, which is expected of them
- well, you'd better hope that you're never taken hostage anywhere where the local authorities share your attitude - or do you think that it would be right for them to kill you, as well as your captors? What is expected of them is to keep track of what is going on, & make decisions based on as much information as possible. This is policing, not a war!

Hiten
BRFite
Posts: 1101
Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Location: Baudland
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Hiten » 27 Nov 2008 23:22

~Edit~
Okay it appears that the IN did not claim it sunk the mother ship, but a ship of dimensions similar to that of a mother ship

My bad

Thanks Rahul M:)
Last edited by Hiten on 27 Nov 2008 23:51, edited 1 time in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Rahul M » 27 Nov 2008 23:34

edit: hiten, thanks.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: INS Tabar destroys pirate mothership

Postby Rahul M » 27 Nov 2008 23:51

- well, you'd better hope that you're never taken hostage anywhere where the local authorities share your attitude - or do you think that it would be right for them to kill you, as well as your captors? What is expected of them is to keep track of what is going on, & make decisions based on as much information as possible. This is policing, not a war!


paul, would a pithy fishing vessel 'attack' a warship if it had hostages on-board who could be used for tactics like bargaining or even human-shield ?
no one in their right mind would have done it.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cain Marko and 68 guests