Tanker filled with laundered diesel stolen from Aiken Army Barracks.

Klunk001

A little bit embarrassing I would think.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0526/452819-tanker-stolen-from-army-barracks-in-co-louth/

CarrickMcJoe

Look on the bright side, if they were at war, it could have been the enemy.

M three

Could only have been done with some inside assistance.
Serious questions to be asked about this incident but no doubt there wont even be an investigation.

Morpheus

M three wrote: »

Could only have been done with some inside assistance.
Serious questions to be asked about this incident but no doubt there wont even be an investigation.

2 seperate investigatiins under way aaccording to news.

As for insider job. . . You are suggesting that soldiers in the barracks are criminals. Be careful with comments like that. Unless you have proof otherwise.

ardinn

What a Shambles!

L5

A serious embarrassment for the army

Outkast_IRE

M three wrote: »

Could only have been done with some inside assistance.
Serious questions to be asked about this incident but no doubt there wont even be an investigation.

It would not need insider assistance, but what I will say is that perimeter security in many barracks is lax enough, I have worked at a few barracks and as an outsider I could see there wasn't enough resources to maintain a high level of security to the perimeter at night. The only areas I seen a good level of security was armouries.

M three

Morpheus wrote: »

2 seperate investigatiins under way aaccording to news.

As for insider job. . . You are suggesting that soldiers in the barracks are criminals. Be careful with comments like that. Unless you have proof otherwise.

Well I wont hold my breath for any meaningful conclusions from either of those.

And why not? Pretty obvious they had some help from inside. Even if it was a tip off about what time would be best, where the tanker was, etc etc

Also serious incompetence.

But shur according to you we cant say things like that now can we.

the_syco

Morpheus wrote: »

As for insider job. . . You are suggesting that soldiers in the barracks are criminals. Be careful with comments like that. Unless you have proof otherwise.

Is there any 3rd party workers on site?

Not so unnerved about someone stealing a tanker, but the fact that he got in unnoticed, and was able to drive off with it... I wonder how locked down is the barracks?

the_syco

Seems it was a tanker with 20,000 litres of fuel in it.

Zane97

You have to hand it to them.

They go to extreme lengths

Zambia

While its not a great result. Unless you have actually stood a post or guarded something for a long time I would not be judging to quickly.

Without knowing or even seeing the barracks I reckon I could have done this If the paycheck was big enough.

Manic Moran

In fairness, Irish barracks are hardly high security facilities. As the man above said, the armoury is one thing, the rest of the base, not so much.

That said, I would hate to be the Sergeant of the Guard reporting in to the CO the next morning.

goldie fish

At least it was a tanker and not a tank...

Morpheus

One and only Warning . Discussion of the various security arrangements / levels of security, at Irish military posts will not be tolerated on this forum.

Also unless you have facts to back up your comments or wish to spend some time in solitary, hearsay about the good charater and dignity of the defence forces based on your own private investigations will not be tolerated either. This isn't AH

Morpheus

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

It would not need insider assistance, but what I will say is that perimeter security in many barracks is lax enough, I have worked at a few barracks and as an outsider I could see there wasn't enough resources to maintain a high level of security to the perimeter at night. The only areas I seen a good level of security was armouries.

Are you an expert in the field of military installation security? Do you know the ins and outs of how that is maintained in a barracks?

tigger1962

M three wrote: »

Well I wont hold my breath for any meaningful conclusions from either of those.

And why not? Pretty obvious they had some help from inside. Even if it was a tip off about what time would be best, where the tanker was, etc etc

Also serious incompetence.

But shur according to you we cant say things like that now can we.

It wouldn't be hard to examine the perimeter and combined with satellite photos from say Google Maps and a private plane(there are so many flying around these days taking photos) it wouldn't be hard to find the truck from the air. There are two main exits that i can see and one of those looks like it is made of wood.. I think, and would provide a direct access to the main routes out of Dundalk.

[MOD]please do not disclose discussion of security information here [/MOD]


This strikes me as a paramilitary operation, well planned/executed... and i'd say they had help alright but not necessarily an inside job!


that said I wouldn't be one of the guys on guard duty that night or be working there

WilcoOut

the_syco wrote: »

Seems it was a tanker with 20,000 litres of fuel in it.

If only somebody put a round through the tank


KABOOM


and justice is done

gobnaitolunacy

WilcoOut wrote: »

If only somebody put a round through the tank


KABOOM


and justice is done

It's Diesel....the 'kaboom' would be somewhat more muted.

On second thoughts might not be a bad idea...they'd have a trail of spilled fuel to follow.

CarrickMcJoe

May have been this guy.....

the_syco

tigger1962 wrote: »

This strikes me as a paramilitary operation, well planned/executed... and i'd say they had help alright but not necessarily an inside job!

It's laundered fuel, so it's a given the paramilitaries would have something to do with it.

I'd wonder if this is the usual thing for Revenue to do (putting a tanker in the barracks), or do they usually store it elsewhere. I ask this, as the Revenue must have gotten tankers before, but I've never heard of this sort of counter-raid happening before.

asdfg!

In all seriousness there is no excuse for this. It's unbelievable that someone could simply make their way into the barracks, guarded let me remind you by soldiers with assault rifles and simply drive through the gate and away just like that.

It's an absolute disgrace. You can be sure Revenue will be furious. This has to be a career ending disgrace for certain people officers involved, if not a court martial offence.

There is simply no excuse for this. At it's simplest any vehicle can be immobilised in a couple of minutes. It's a massive security cock up.

The army will be a laughing stock.

Zambia

asdfg! wrote: »

In all seriousness there is no excuse for this. It's unbelievable that someone could simply make their way into the barracks, guarded let me remind you by soldiers with assault rifles and simply drive through the gate and away just like that.

It's an absolute disgrace. You can be sure Revenue will be furious. This has to be a career ending disgrace for certain people officers involved, if not a court martial offence.

There is simply no excuse for this. At it's simplest any vehicle can be immobilised in a couple of minutes. It's a massive security cock up.

The army will be a laughing stock.

WilcoOut

asdfg! wrote: »

In all seriousness there is no excuse for this. It's unbelievable that someone could simply make their way into the barracks, guarded let me remind you by soldiers with assault rifles and simply drive through the gate and away just like that.

It's an absolute disgrace. You can be sure Revenue will be furious. This has to be a career ending disgrace for certain people officers involved, if not a court martial offence.

There is simply no excuse for this. At it's simplest any vehicle can be immobilised in a couple of minutes. It's a massive security cock up.

The army will be a laughing stock.

You would think the safe keeping of a single vehicle would be an easy task for a fulltime standing army

hedgehog2

Looks like the sentry was catching 40 winks not long after he accounted for the lads staggering back from the pub.
It just shows ya what a lack of concern these guys have for an Irish armed military base that they can swan in and drive out a massive lorry without even being approached or stopped.
Serious lack of security by the army it does not look good at all,bordering on farcical.

Jo King

the_syco wrote: »

It's laundered fuel, so it's a given the paramilitaries would have something to do with it.

I'd wonder if this is the usual thing for Revenue to do (putting a tanker in the barracks), or do they usually store it elsewhere. I ask this, as the Revenue must have gotten tankers before, but I've never heard of this sort of counter-raid happening before.

Something similar happened in Athlone about 10 years ago. The guards brought in a seized vehicle to Custume Barracks. The vehicle was subsequently stolen from the barracks.
Whilst one can say it shouldn't happen, it is not surprising in many ways. There are very few personnel living in barracks compared to years ago. In particular there is often no recruit platoon in training in most barracks. There just aren't the people moving around to watch everything.

asdfg!

It's not an overreaction. The ease with which these people entered a military installation and simply took back their impounded vehicle without a single shot being fired is simply outrageous. They clearly had little fear of interception. It's an oil tanker, full of fuel. You could probably keep up with it on moped. Yet it got clean away.

The only logical conclusion is that the barracks was not properly guarded and there was a degree of complaceny.

What next an attack on the armoury by dissidents?

Morpheus

This crap happens all over the world all of the time

also,

truck = property of revenue

IMO revenue should provide funding for vehicle storage areas in barracks that they wish to secure evidence like this, along with CCTV coverage of the building.

The barracks is plainly in the middle of a highly urbanised location,

do you think the army would be justified to lamp off a few hundred rounds, possibly disabling a large vehicle weighing many tons, moving at high speed and carrying 20000 litres of flammable liquid, possibly sending it out of control and ploughing into residential homes?

how do you know that a very intelligent decision to NOT fire wasnt made and issued due to the safety concerns for residents? It can be just as hard to make that decision either way.

What about other armies, our closest neighbours for example?

Be glad that it wasn't guns or ammo in this case and that, believe me, our armouries are very well guarded all of the time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158432/MoD-lost-165-pistols-rifles-machine-guns--27-000-rounds-ammunition.html

More than 165 pistols, rifles and machine guns have been lost by or stolen from the Armed Forces in the past three years.
Figures obtained using the Freedom of Information Act also show that more than 27,000 bullets have gone missing during the same period.
It means an average of 56 guns were stolen or lost in each of the past three years - whereas around 20 weapons were stolen or lost every year during the previous decade.

Last night the Conservatives and anti-gun groups criticised the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for losing track of weapons.

Missing:
The SA80 assault rifle can fire 30 bullets in five seconds and is lethal at up to half a mile

Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, Dr Liam Fox, said: 'The MoD needs to tighten up security.
'These lost or stolen guns must not end up in criminal hands.'
The lost haul includes a number of high-velocity SA80 automatic assault rifles that can fire off 30 rounds in five seconds and are lethal from up to a kilometre away.
It also includes Browning 9mm pistols. Both weapons are standard issue weapon of the British Armed Forces.
In December 2007, the MoD revealed the gun used to shoot WPC Rachael Bown, 24, in the stomach in Nottingham in 2006, had been stolen from the Army.

The Browning 9mm pistol used in the attack had been stolen from a British military base or smuggled by troops from Afghanistan or Iraq and sold to thugs by a soldier.
The National Ballistics Intelligence Programme, the agency charged with tracking firearms around the country, has launched an investigation into how the gun ended up on the streets.
Paula Ogunboro set up campaign group Mothers Against Guns after her son Eugene, 25, was shot dead at a party in Toxteth, Liverpool, in 2003.
Mrs Ogunboro, from Liverpool, whose son was killed by a gun which was stolen from members of a shooting club, said: 'It is appalling to think so many guns have gone missing from the Armed Forces.

Ammo:
More than 27,000 rounds of ammunition has gone missing in the past three years

WPC Rachael Bown was killed by a gun stolen from the Armed Forces
'This is an unbelievably large amount of deadly weapons which could easily fall into criminal hands and kill people.
'Eugene was shot by a stolen gun which found its way to Liverpool. Stolen weapons cause an untold amount of suffering for families.
'The military should be able to account for all its weapons. How on Earth do guns and bullets get stolen? Weapons should be under lock and key when not in use.
'The Armed Forces should be protecting us rather than losing deadly weapons. In no circumstances should a weapon ever go missing.'
The latest figures reveal the Armed Forces lost 35 pistols, 43 rifles and six machine guns between January 2006 and December 2008.
A total of 39 pistols, 42 rifles and three machine guns were stolen during the same period.
The military also recorded 29,283 bullets stolen and 17,022 bullets lost over the three years period. It managed to recover 19, 042 of these bullets.
The MoD refused to reveal how many of these weapons or bullets were lost or stolen from home or how many were lost or stolen from units serving overseas.
Last year, three soldiers were jailed for a total of 28 years after taking huge quantities of explosives from a British Army barracks in Canterbury, Kent.
Colour Sergeant Garry Graham, 37, Lance Corporal Martyn Fitzsimmons, 28, and Sergeant Kieran Campbell, 27, took a massive cache of weapons including plastic explosives and grenades to sell to druglords.
All three soldiers from Glasgow had been serving members of the 5th Battalion the Royal Regiment of Scotland stationed in Canterbury, Kent.
Between 2000 and 2007, a total of 109 guns were lost or stolen from military barracks in Britain. Only 35 weapons have been recovered.
Of the 200 guns that went missing between 1997 and 2006, 30 were antique rifles taken from the walls of officers messes.
An MoD spokesman said: 'The Ministry of Defence takes every reasonable precaution to ensure all weapons are controlled and stored securely.
'Comprehensive records are maintained to enable accurate accounting and are subject to both regular and spot checks.
'We also have specific operations designed to deter those personnel from all three services who may be tempted to illegally import items and also to identify those who transgress.
'This includes a combined information campaign and a physical search of all equipment including personal baggage, etc returning to peacetime locations.
'All security measures are subject to continuous review, security surveys and audits.'

hedgehog2

"IMO revenue should provide funding for vehicle storage areas in barracks that they wish to secure evidence like this, along with CCTV coverage of the building".
Revenue and the army all suck from the same government teeth,why should they provide funding to bump up security.
Surely a basic sentry could have prevented this unless there was none or they were asleep which is probably the most likely scenario.
Why did`nt they give chase,I pity that soldier on duty.
They most likely have a little routine to catch a few zzzzz`s during a certain time when there is no traffic or footfall and this gang figured it out to strike at the optimum time.
Do you really think a cctv camera would prevent them if the prospect of a soldier with a rifle will not deter them then they sure as heel could`nt give a monkeys if a cctv camera was in operation as who would be watching it probably the fella who should have been watching the gate

gobnaitolunacy

CCTV is not much use in low light and if the perp covers his face.

iceage

I feel sorry for the poor bastard on the gate..

Morpheus

hedgehog2 wrote: »

They most likely have a little routine to catch a few zzzzz`s during a certain time when there is no traffic or footfall and this gang figured it out to strike at the optimum time.

Looks like the sentry was catching 40 winks not long after he accounted for the lads staggering back from the pub.

[MOD]From two separate posts. this is your only warning, trolling comments are not tolerated, either add to the debate with sensible comments or points of view, backed up with facts or references particularly cases you know of where soldiers are sleeping at their posts, or you can wander in the wilderness to cool your heels.Same goes for everyone, this is the military forum and is frequented by serving and past members, read the charter, trolling is not tolerated, this is not AH. [/MOD]

Jawgap

M three

Morpheus wrote: »

This crap happens all over the world all of the time

also,

truck = property of revenue

IMO revenue should provide funding for vehicle storage areas in barracks that they wish to secure evidence like this, along with CCTV coverage of the building.

The barracks is plainly in the middle of a highly urbanised location, do you think the army would be justified to lamp off a few hundred rounds, possibly disabling a large vehicle weighing many tons, moving at high speed and carrying 20000 litres of flammable liquid, possibly sending it out of control and ploughing into residential homes?

how do you know that a very intelligent decision to NOT fire wasnt made and issued due to the safety concerns for residents? It can be just as hard to make that decision either way.

What about other armies, our closest neighbours for example?

Be glad that it wasn't guns or ammo in this case and that, believe me, our armouries are very well guarded all of the time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158432/MoD-lost-165-pistols-rifles-machine-guns--27-000-rounds-ammunition.html

Thats all fine and dandy but you're making it sound like someone snuck the tanker out of a little hole in the fence. The tanker held 20,000 liters of fuel and was driven out of there. Through a gate. How hard is it to keep an eye on people coming in a gate, and minutes later driving a fuel tanker out, and off down the road.
Also comparing this to cases or pistols going missing is misleading. Since when is a pistol the size of a tanker?

Jo King

Morpheus wrote: »

This crap happens all over the world all of the time

also,

truck = property of revenue

IMO revenue should provide funding for vehicle storage areas in barracks that they wish to secure evidence like this, along with CCTV coverage of the building.

l[/url]

There is no need for any of that. When the truck came in the battery could have been taken out, the fuel drained, the wheels removed, the steering wheel chained and about 20 other simple measures which would have ensured that the truck would not go anywhere until it was supposed to. A competent mechanic could have disabled the truck in 5 minutes so that it wouldn't be going anywhere until he came back.

WilcoOut

M three wrote: »

Thats all fine and dandy but you're making it sound like someone snuck the tanker out of a little hole in the fence. The tanker held 20,000 liters of fuel and was driven out of there. Through a gate. How hard is it to keep an eye on people coming in a gate, and minutes later driving a fuel tanker out, and off down the road.
Also comparing this to cases or pistols going missing is misleading. Since when is a pistol the size of a tanker?

A tankers im sure would make quite a racket when it is started in the dead of night in a barrcks

did it arouse nobodys suspicion?

I would love to know where the stand to gaurd were and the BOO.

hedgehog2

How far away is coppers from the barracks? and not the niteclub although that could explain a lot.

WilcoOut

hedgehog2 wrote: »

How far away is coppers from the barracks? and not the niteclub although that could explain a lot.

They should stay closer from now on since their cousins in green cant mind a pram

Jawgap

Jo King wrote: »

There is no need for any of that. When the truck came in the battery could have been taken out, the fuel drained, the wheels removed, the steering wheel chained and about 20 other simple measures which would have ensured that the truck would not go anywhere until it was supposed to. A competent mechanic could have disabled the truck in 5 minutes so that it wouldn't be going anywhere until he came back.

Yes, and it would have only taken 5 minutes for a competent mechanic to re-enable the truck......

.....sounds like Revenue were too tight to pay for it to be secured privately.

Also why leave it in Dundalk? Why wasn't it driven to their own compound in the docks in Dublin? Sounds like some lazy arse C&E officer couldn't be bothered to drive down the M1.

Morpheus

Locking thread.
This is an open garda and military investigation and some comments are swinging from pure muppetry to dangerous speculation about how the raid was carried out up to and including security at military installations. I dont have time to MOD all day either.

Infractions issued, thread closed.