Does Crime Pay? "Somali Jack" Sparrow says "Yes!"

[egslim]

All of that, and more, are available on the standard combatant, frigate and larger. You are wrong to assert the need to purpose build an anti piracy vessel. Sonar does not get in the way of the mission, but is required for other missions. Likewise some of the esoteric comms gear. It's part of the multi purpose nature of a combatant.

Nowhere did I assert the need to immediately build an anti-piracy vessel.

Multi purpose naval units currently available are as up to the job as any dedicated anti piracy design. But they are also far more expensive, and in the long term cost is an issue. If this piracy isn't checked at the source a continuous naval presence will be necessary, and that makes cheap specialised anti piracy vessels the most cost effective solution.

 

[geni]

It wasn't until the second Barbary War in 1815 that the US put an end to the payment of tribute.

But not the piracy. That went on until france occupied the place. Dispite some fairly significant european raids.

 

[Toke]

I have sailed through the bay of aden on large container vessels doing 23-25 knots, we were not worried.

Christian X (our last monarch) wrote a naval roe stating rougly translated "It is the duty of the vessel commander to open fire when he find it neccecery to complete his mission"
Heard it was the envy of all of nato.

It is obviusly not in place for Absalon off somalia.

Absalon is brand new and have two 30mm and one 127mm cannon plus an armed helicopter and some missiles. It cannot be a practical problem to defeat a fishing/pirate kanoo.
Nor can it be a problem to launch a punitive bombardment of the kanoo port of a pirate hangout.
It had litle suches on the barbary pirates, but they had a easier time finding new vessels.

We installed a new 3cm radar before I went on leave, can naval vessels track those 100 miles off? And track down a mothership? (if not I will be disapointed)

If you give a free hand to the naval officers I an sure they can come up with good ideas, some will have read up on naval history and know what have been tried before in what situations.

(Was´nt the USMC created for a punitive expedition on the barbary coast?)

 

[Toke]

I only have experince with us coastguarders at port state inspections, and have read of sea marshalls. Kids with guns.

The us navy must be better than that.
And can be trusted to shoot up a pirate kanoo.

 

[egslim]

We installed a new 3cm radar before I went on leave, can naval vessels track those 100 miles off? And track down a mothership? (if not I will be disapointed)

I'm sorry, 100 miles off is behind the horizon.

If you give a free hand to the naval officers I an sure they can come up with good ideas, some will have read up on naval history and know what have been tried before in what situations.

Naval history is depressing in that regard. While piracy can be supressed in many ways, the only way to really end it is to colonize the place. Which is how France eventually finished the Barbary pirates.

 

[Toke]

I'm sorry, 100 miles off is behind the horizon.

Yes, but they do "bend" a bit

 

[dudalb]

(Was´nt the USMC created for a punitive expedition on the barbary coast?)

No, it was created in 1776 to do the same job the British Royal Marines were doing: Provide landing parties for the Navy, and sharpshooters for boarding actions.
The actions against the Barbary Pirates were right up their alley.
"To The Shores of Tripoli" as the Marines' Hymn has it.

 

[gumboot]

Does anyone know how effective the E-8 Joint STARS or RC-135 RIVET JOINT are over water? The Joint STARS can cover 50,000km at once and track up to 600 targets so methinks it could be a handy C2 platform for coordinating a serious effort against pirates. As pointed out, the motherships would be hard to detect but the actual attack ships would be relatively easy to pick up and could be tracked back to the motherships.

I'm thinking no long-term effort is required - a brief full-scale move against these pirates might be enough to discourage them.

 

[geni]

I'm thinking no long-term effort is required - a brief full-scale move against these pirates might be enough to discourage them.

Not really. You've got a bunch of previously rather poor people with no effective goverment right next to a major shipping lane. As long as that remains the case short term reductions in activity cannot be expected to hold.

 

[Alareth]

No, it was created in 1776 to do the same job the British Royal Marines were doing: Provide landing parties for the Navy, and sharpshooters for boarding actions.
The actions against the Barbary Pirates were right up their alley.
"To The Shores of Tripoli" as the Marines' Hymn has it.

The Marines were sharpshooters that took position in the yardarms during naval engagements, it wasn't until the Barbary Wars that they were first used as a landing force.

 

[Travis]

The Marines were sharpshooters that took position in the yardarms during naval engagements, it wasn't until the Barbary Wars that they were first used as a landing force.

I thought they captured the Bahamas before that?

 

[Alareth]

I thought they captured the Bahamas before that?

I had a roommate that was an ex-Marine and he would take any opportunity to proudly retell the history of the Corps at length.

He never mentioned the Bahamas, but there is always the possibility he might be missing a fact or two.

His favorite anecdote was how the Marines earned the nickname Devil Dogs.

 

[gumboot]

The Marines were sharpshooters that took position in the yardarms during naval engagements, it wasn't until the Barbary Wars that they were first used as a landing force.

Both the pre-USMC marine units and the early USMC appear to have been heavily involved in amphibious attacks from the outset.

Some early examples:

Nobel Jones' Company of Marine Boatmen:
Gully Hole Creek, July 7, 1742
Bloody Marsh, July 7, 1742

Continental Marines:
Raised to raid Halifax (Nov, 1775)
Battle of Nassau, March 2 - 3, 1776, first US Amphibious Assault
Dec - Jan 1776-77 Fought on land in Washington's army as Philadelphia Militia
Penobscot Expedition - multiple landings and assaults

United States Marine Corps:
Quasi-War - conducted multiple raids including multiple landings at Haiti
First Barbary War - Tripoli and Derna

And so forth...

It appears land-based warfare and amphibious assaults have always been a fundamental part of US Marine warfare.

 

[JoeyDonuts]

I'm sorry, 100 miles off is behind the horizon.

Surface search radars can propagate well beyond line of sight or visible horizon with enough dBm to get a solid ESM hit. Two or more units with coordinating ESM gear, and you get a pretty solid ESM datum with an area of uncertainty of around +/-3nm.

The atmospherics do play a role in the attenuation of radar signals, but in that part of the world it's a pretty good environment. It gets well enough hot and humid in some parts there that you can get a phenomenon called RF ducting, which can extend the counterdetection range of RF to hundreds of miles.

I have yet to see a commercial-grade surface search radar that had an effective range that terminates at the horizon. Wouldn't be much good if it did.

 

[Toke]

Our radar have a max display setting of 24 nm, I expect it to be detectable at longer range.
Biggest problem would be pirates with an AIS system. It is a new safety/anti terrorist measure that let you locate and identify any other ship with one. Must be very usefull for a pirate.

 

[Alareth]

I actually miss working with surface radar. I started out with an AN/SPS-64 aboard my first command then moved on to the wonderful SPY-1B when I worked my way up to the CIC on an Aegis cruiser.

 

[Darth Rotor]

If you give a free hand to the naval officers I an sure they can come up with good ideas, some will have read up on naval history and know what have been tried before in what situations.

While I appreciate the sentiment, a free hand isn't given for political reasons. That's reality.

(Was´nt the USMC created for a punitive expedition on the barbary coast?)

No. It was created about thirty years before that. (1775)

At its founding, the Marine Corps served as infantry aboard naval vessels and was responsible for the security of the ship and her crew by conducting offensive and defensive combat during boarding actions, and defending the ship's officers from mutiny; to the latter end, their quarters on ship were often strategically positioned between the officers' quarters and the rest of the vessel. Continental Marines also manned raiding parties, both at sea and ashore. America's first amphibious assault landing occurred early in the Revolutionary War as the Marines gained control of a British ammunition depot and naval port in New Providence, Bahamas.

The United States Marine Corps traces its institutional roots to the Continental Marines of the American Revolutionary War, formed at Tun Tavern in Philadelphia, by a resolution of the Second Continental Congress on November 10, 1775, to raise 2 battalions of Marines. That date is regarded and celebrated as the date of the Marine Corps' "birthday". At the end of the American Revolution, both the Continental Navy and Continental Marines were disbanded in April of 1783. Although individual Marines stayed on for the few American naval vessels left, the last Continental Marine was discharged in September 1783. The institution itself would not be resurrected until 1798. In that year, in preparation for the Naval War with France, Congress created the United States Navy and Marine Corps.

There ya go.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

Does anyone know how effective the E-8 Joint STARS or RC-135 RIVET JOINT are over water? The Joint STARS can cover 50,000km at once and track up to 600 targets so methinks it could be a handy C2 platform for coordinating a serious effort against pirates. As pointed out, the motherships would be hard to detect but the actual attack ships would be relatively easy to pick up and could be tracked back to the motherships.

US Navy and Royal Navy have had ISAR capability for over twenty years. JSTARS is SAR, Rivet Joint is a comms intercept, not a rader plane.

ISAR is sufficient for this purpose.

ISAR = Inverse Synthetic Aperture Rader
SAR = Synthetic Aperture Rader

I am a few years out of date, but I think SAR has trouble with clutter/water droplets and vapor over water, which ISAR is not as susceptible to. Memory a bit fuzzy on that.

E-2C has surface search mode. Handy. Most naval helicopters have standard radar, beyond that I won't comment.

There are also a suite of other sensors on P-3 series of patrol planes. Clever stuff. Also no comment.

DR

 

[gumboot]

US Navy and Royal Navy have had ISAR capability for over twenty years. JSTARS is SAR, Rivet Joint is a comms intercept, not a rader plane.

ISAR is sufficient for this purpose.

ISAR = Inverse Synthetic Aperture Rader
SAR = Synthetic Aperture Rader

I am a few years out of date, but I think SAR has trouble with clutter/water droplets and vapor over water, which ISAR is not as susceptible to. Memory a bit fuzzy on that.

E-2C has surface search mode. Handy. Most naval helicopters have standard radar, beyond that I won't comment.

There are also a suite of other sensors on P-3 series of patrol planes. Clever stuff. Also no comment.

DR

Ack, you're quite right, I was thinking of other RC-135 varients. Too bad Rivet Amber crashed, from wiki:

The radar system alone weighed over 35,000 pounds and cost over USD$35 million (1960 dollars), making Rivet Amber both the heaviest C-135-derivative aircraft flying and the most expensive Air Force aircraft for its time. The radiation generated by the radar was sufficient to be a health hazard to the crew, and both ends of the radar compartment were shielded by thick lead bulkheads. This prevented the forward and aft crew areas from having direct contact after boarding the aircraft. The system could track an object the size of a soccer ball from a distance of 300 miles (480 km).

 

[JoeyDonuts]

I am a few years out of date, but I think SAR has trouble with clutter/water droplets and vapor over water, which ISAR is not as susceptible to. Memory a bit fuzzy on that.

E-2C has surface search mode. Handy. Most naval helicopters have standard radar, beyond that I won't comment.

There are also a suite of other sensors on P-3 series of patrol planes. Clever stuff. Also no comment.

Ding, ding and ding. You win a cookie.