EU anti-piracy fleet, will we be involved?

Tabnabs

EU begins anti-piracy mission
The deployment will be the European Union's
first-ever naval mission [AFP]

The European Union is to take over anti-piracy operations off the Horn of Africa from Nato vessels, deploying six warships and three surveillance aircraft in the region.

The official start of the EU's first ever naval mission on Monday comes after pirates set fire to a Dutch container ship in an unsuccessful attack off the coast of Tanzania.

Some details of the EU mission, the bloc's first-ever naval operation, have still to be finalised.

EU forces may hand over suspects to third countries such as Kenya for trial, Germany said on Sunday.

Only a few navies can actually catch and try suspects and EU nations are not allowed to turn over suspects to countries where they might face the death penalty.

"The EU is reviewing agreements whereby suspects could be taken by third countries that are willing and in a position to launch criminal proceedings," Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the German foreign minister, said on German public broadcaster ZDF.

"Moreover we are in favour of reviewing whether the United Nations could use existing international courts or found a new one to conduct such criminal proceedings," he said.

The EU mission will patrol an area of around one million square kilometres and critics have questioned whether the mission will serve any meaningful purpose.

Some argue that the only way to combat piracy is to start the battle on land, in war-torn Somalia.

"You don't stop piracy on the seas. You stop piracy on the land," General John Craddock, Nato's top commander, said last week.

For a year, vessels from at least eight countries - Belgium, the UK, France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden - will escort aid ships.

The mission will be headed by Admiral Phillip Jones, a British officer, and will be headquartered in Northwood near London.

The fleet will initially be led off the coast of Somalia by Greece's Admiral Antonios Popaioannou, with a Spaniard and then a Dutch officer taking over after three month terms.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/12/200812843349810691.html

Fratton Fred

Its about bloody time. Those countries listed have a fair amount of warships knocking around that are more than capable of carrying out patrols.

They all managed it pretty quickly when the Iran-Iraq war was on and the Royal Navy has had a presence in the persian gulf for decades.

Sending them down to Somalia might actually make them work for a living rather than just swanning around the world spreading nasty diseases.;)

and no, I doubt very much the Irish Navy can afford to send a patrol boat down there:)

Manic Moran

Sweden actually has a navy to send...

I'm not sure Ireland can afford to detach any of their patrol vessels, they're busy enough at home as it is.

NTM

djtechnics1210

Not much of comparison to be fair

Irish


American




Swedish




German



UK

lostexpectation

rte today actually used the phrase EU warships, and then had to change it to, eu countries have agree to send some warships to...

djtechnics1210

djtechnics1210 wrote: »

American

No pirates would survive that...... not even Jack Sparrow and the black pearl

concussion

djtechnics1210 wrote: »

No pirates would survive that...... not even Jack Sparrow and the black pearl

Those big guns are impressive, but you'll need a smaller calibre rapid-firing gun to engage very small, very fast craft.

Fratton Fred

or marines

Captain Chaos

No worries that battle ship was retired years ago, last time it was used was in the 1991 Gulf War and in the film Under Siege. The USN don't use ships like that anymore its all about small smart tech cruisers and destroyers.

Manic Moran

Those big guns are impressive, but you'll need a smaller calibre rapid-firing gun to engage very small, very fast craft.

In fairness, when you're firing shells that large, you don't need to be all that accurate. The splash alone will swamp most of those small Pirate vessels.

Besides, the 5" guns on American warships today aren't exactly 'small'

I just noticed the bow wave on that picture. Recoil shoving the ship a few feet to port?

NTM

concussion

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, when you're firing shells that large, you don't need to be all that accurate. The splash alone will swamp most of those small Pirate vessels.

Besides, the 5" guns on American warships today aren't exactly 'small'

I just noticed the bow wave on that picture. Recoil shoving the ship a few feet to port?

NTM

True, but if you miss the first time you're stuck with slow traverse and no proximity fuses. Plus a breech loading system which uses bagged powder charges. It would be a bit like taking on a speeding HUMVEE with a battery of 155mm howitzers instead of a 20mm cannon. If you could fire a 155 directly that is! All that being said, devastating broadside...

Manic Moran

concussion wrote: »

True, but if you miss the first time you're stuck with slow traverse and no proximity fuses.

In fairness, it's like saying that Tiger tanks had a slow turret. In practice, unless you managed to get really close and were fairly fast, the turret could keep up. So how close and fast would you have to be that the 203mm guns couldn't keep up?

(Besides, it also has a whole slew of 5" secondary backups)

If you could fire a 155 directly that is!

You could. Direct fire is part of the gunnery qualification table for American M109 crews. You can argue that it's overkill compared to the 20mm, but it'll work.

NTM

concussion

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, it's like saying that Tiger tanks had a slow turret. In practice, unless you managed to get really close and were fairly fast, the turret could keep up. So how close and fast would you have to be that the 203mm guns couldn't keep up?

(Besides, it also has a whole slew of 5" secondary backups)

I see your point about very little change in bearing consequently little traverse, but if the target is small and fast and capable of very quick changes in direction then I think there would be a problem. If you think otherwise then I reckon you win, you're the expert when it comes to large calibre and crossing targets. How about you grab a Tiger and I'll find a motorbike and we'll start on level ground, 5k separation

Manic Moran wrote: »

You could. Direct fire is part of the gunnery qualification table for American M109 crews. You can argue that it's overkill compared to the 20mm, but it'll work.

NTM

Nice. However would they hit said target?

Thirdfox

Didn't two pirate speed boats escape from under the Indian navy's missile cruiser fire? Can't be all that easy to hit a small target then (unless you want to waste a multi-million euro missile I suppose...)

The Swiss have a better navy than the Irish right?
...oh looks like it was just a joke:
Swiss:

Local-womanizer

In fairness If you have seen some of the pirate ''Boats'' you could hire a fat man to bomb beside them and that would take them out..........

It would also provide quite humorous veiwing for everybody else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3zA1bYqe3M

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Well the navy have their work cut out for them here as it is. Plus I don't think any of our boats would be able to spend much time out at sea, couple of weeks I think is it? Not 100% sure about this. It's beyond me how any of the pirates escaped those ships... Laughable really

Thirdfox

The Irish navy has managed to go all the way to Shanghai... Somalia wouldn't be a problem if the will was there.

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:oqTMzaCEJYQJ:english.peopledaily.com.cn/200203/30/eng20020330_93163.shtml+irish+navy+shanghai&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

or do you mean getting supplies etc. at sea? Couldn't they restock in Yemen?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Yea possibly, they just wouldn't be fit for long out at sea missions, you know? Plus the ships that we have are really essential to operations at home. We have a lot of water to cover and with such a small fleet. How you think soo many drugs get into the country? Realisticly speaking, I think we need to up the fleet somewhat.

Fratton Fred

Emilee Dead Face wrote: »

Yea possibly, they just wouldn't be fit for long out at sea missions, you know? Plus the ships that we have are really essential to operations at home. We have a lot of water to cover and with such a small fleet. How you think soo many drugs get into the country? Realisticly speaking, I think we need to up the fleet somewhat.

I would presume that part of this "Fleet" would be an RFA supply ship, or their French/Dutch/German counterpart.

dogmatix

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, it's like saying that Tiger tanks had a slow turret. In practice, unless you managed to get really close and were fairly fast, the turret could keep up. So how close and fast would you have to be that the 203mm guns couldn't keep up?

(Besides, it also has a whole slew of 5" secondary backups)



You could. Direct fire is part of the gunnery qualification table for American M109 crews. You can argue that it's overkill compared to the 20mm, but it'll work.

NTM

Those are 406mm guns - your probably thinking of a Des Moines class heavy cruiser which where very similar in appearence. Two of the Iowa class battleships remained on the US navy reserve list until well into the 2000's. Most of them are now museum ships.

They would be highly impressive, albiet inpractible for anti-piracy usage. A frigate sized ship or smaller with at least one 100mm or 75mm gun and some heavy cannons would be an ideal anti piracy vessel.

Fratton Fred

dogmatix wrote: »

They would be highly impressive, albiet inpractible for anti-piracy usage. A frigate sized ship or smaller with at least one 100mm or 75mm gun and some heavy cannons would be an ideal anti piracy vessel.

A type 23 Frigate (The UK one pictured earlier) is more than enough to look after a pirate ship armed with little more than a few AK47s and RPGs. the 4.5" guns on them are pretty accurate and have a range of over 20,000metres and at 25 rounds per minute would take care of a tug sixed craft fairly promptly, that is if they were indeed ever needed. I doubt any pirate is going to mess with two RIBs full of marines supported by a helicoptor.

Zuiderzee

Our Naval Service has patrol vessels as opposed to warships.

They are not designed for prolonged deployment, especially without a support base. They are also designed for North Atlantic waters, just keeping Air Con going on a vessel n the tropics can be a nightmare.

I was in Western Australia on an ex RN vessel which was designed for the med - and that had major problems.

Our Naval Service do a great job given their resources, but they are not even sufficient for proper patrol of our EEZ.

This has been long established as requiring a minimum of:
2x HPV
6x OPV
4x CPV
(source: Janes Fighting Ships)

When that is sorted out, mabe then the state can look at taking part in overseas deployments as part of a Multi National task force.

Manic Moran

Those are 406mm guns - your probably thinking of a Des Moines class heavy cruiser which where very similar in appearence

Nope, I just ballsed it up. I'm used to thinking '203mm as the largest' given that one of the vehicles on the tank tour I routinely give is a 2S7, the largest gun ever mounted on a tracked vehicle at 203mm.

I should have known better.

USS Iowa is actually just up the road from me, I saw her only last Thursday.

NTM

Run_to_da_hills

French Navy catching Somali Pirates.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7859904.stm

Rovi

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, when you're firing shells that large, you don't need to be all that accurate. The splash alone will swamp most of those small Pirate vessels.

And if you can sneak up close enough, the muzzle blast would do a pretty good number on them too:

twinytwo

strange boats the sweds have... whats up with the design?

djtechnics1210

twinytwo wrote: »

strange boats the sweds have... whats up with the design?

Very Strange

concussion

Stealth design, even the gun is enclosed until it fires. As for the last one, WTF??

Tribunius

concussion wrote: »

Stealth design, even the gun is enclosed until it fires. As for the last one, WTF??

Its an optical illusion. There are actually two things in that picture. The thing that is closer to the camera (sam 3) is a mine hunting rov. The vessel behind it is a mine sweeper.

trentf

djtechnics1210 wrote: »

Not much of comparison to be fair

Irish


American




Swedish




German



UK

Please don't do that its depressing enough to hear of barrcks cuts and army recruitment freeze's then to be reminded of our micro machines navy

Fratton Fred

twinytwo wrote: »

strange boats the sweds have... whats up with the design?

The french have something similar, La Fayette frigates, as seen in the film Golden Eye

PoliteFrisbee

djtechnics1210 wrote: »

No pirates would survive that...... not even Jack Sparrow and the black pearl

I do believe it's Captain Jack Sparrow...:D

Manic Moran

Le DOH!



Pirates attempted to board this ship.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518788,00.html

NTM

O'Coonassa

Manic Moran wrote: »

Pirates attempted to board this ship.

lol me hearties, I can't wait until the pirates have a European warship.

Local-womanizer

Manic Moran wrote: »

Le DOH!

Pirates attempted to board this ship.

anybody who attempts to raid a warship deserves to be caught,facepalm is the word isent?

iceage

how do you confuse THAT with a luxury cruiser/yacht/tanker FFS. Daft buggers.

O'Coonassa

iceage wrote: »

how do you confuse THAT with a luxury cruiser/yacht/tanker FFS. Daft buggers.

I don't think there was any confusion. They want a warship.

cushtac

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I don't think there was any confusion. They want a warship.

Then that would make it a case of utter stupidity instead of one of mistaken identity.

Local-womanizer

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I don't think there was any confusion. They want a warship.

If I was a pirate the last thing I would attempt to hi-jack would be a navy vessel with armed commandos and helicopters on board.

The French let them get close enough to capture them,they stayed with the sun to their backs so the dumb pirates couldent make out the ship.

article wrote:

Only one pirate was left on board the mother ship which had nothing on board except fuel and potates, according to Lt. Commander le Quilliec.

They where Irish?!:pac:

Fratton Fred

The French Captain sailed into the sun so they couldn't recognise the ship......rubbish, he was bloody running away but was too slow so they had to stand and fight

iceage

Faire la fugue!!!! Never:D

Thirdfox

To quote the recent Southpark Somali Pirates episode "Le Lightsabre terrible!"

Mweelrea

Thirdfox wrote: »

To quote the recent Southpark Somali Pirates episode "Le Lightsabre terrible!"

Thats probably where they got the idea from lol,

O'Coonassa

cushtac wrote: »

Then that would make it a case of utter stupidity instead of one of mistaken identity.

Utter stupidity often gets called heroism I have noticed.

cushtac

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Utter stupidity often gets called heroism I have noticed.

Are you equating the actions of these criminals with heroism?

O'Coonassa

cushtac wrote: »

Are you equating the actions of these criminals with heroism?

I am certain that to their families and clans they are very heroic.

Local-womanizer

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I am certain that to their families and clans they are very heroic.

The limerick gangs are heroic to their families,that doesnt stop them from being scumbag criminals.

cushtac

O'Coonassa wrote: »

I am certain that to their families and clans they are very heroic.

Yeah, I can see how attacking innocent, unarmed ships (including a ship carrying food aid to Somalia) then putting decent people in fear of their lives while they ransom them for money would make them heroes.

Manic Moran

Are these guys colour blind? If a ship is painted haze gray, it's probably known as a good idea to not to try to raid it.



http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/05/07/somalia.pirates.foiled/index.html

Pirates off the eastern coast of Somalia picked the wrong target this week when they tried to attack a U.S. Navy ship, the Navy said Thursday.

The attempted attack happened Wednesday against the USNS Lewis and Clark, a dry cargo and ammunition ship that supports the U.S. Navy 5th Fleet and coalition ships in the area, the Navy said.

NTM