In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...
Now you're claiming that all the navies in the area are incompetent?
Wow, you're some kind of expert!!

Who said anyone was incompetent. I said we should engage the pirates
at sea,, not invading Somalia.

BUT
The other navies (with the possible exception of the Russians) are
nothing compared to us. They don't have theater surveillance
capability, their air support is limited to land bases for the most
part and they are usually using weapons we gave them because they were
obsolete.
You can hate Reagan but he built us a heluva navy.

All of the NATO navies are integrated into the US's theater surveillance
systems.

The real problem with these surface assets is they are slow to respond
if there is a lot of distance involved. That is why you need to find
the pirates, track them and be there when their course and a likely
target ship course meets.

30 knts over water is fast when you are moving an 500 foot destroyer but
it doesn't do anything to get the assets, 5 inch 50's and RIBS with USCG
officers and PO's and navy sailors putting M16's on the pirates.

Predator drones and a Global Hawk are probably the right tools. We are
the only ones who have them.

The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

In article ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.

On 3/1/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.




That's just stupid.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/1/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.




That's just stupid.

What is your proposal?

On 3/1/11 7:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlepc2dnY5yOPDxdPHQnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/1/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.




That's just stupid.

What is your proposal?



I've told you; *I* don't pretend to have a solution for the Somali
piracy problem. My suggestion was that we need to get more nations
involved in patrols so that there are more "assets" keeping watch.
Whatever we do, though, has to fall within the limitations of
international law. We are not a rogue state.

I am sure our state department and military discuss the piracy issue
regularly with their colleagues in other nations. I doubt the ideas of a
former marine reservist who never attended college or even got an
overseas posting are of much interest.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/1/11 7:54 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlepc2dnY5yOPDxdPHQnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 3/1/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.




That's just stupid.

What is your proposal?



I've told you; *I* don't pretend to have a solution for the Somali
piracy problem. My suggestion was that we need to get more nations
involved in patrols so that there are more "assets" keeping watch.
Whatever we do, though, has to fall within the limitations of
international law. We are not a rogue state.

Your suggestion is vague, stupid and devoid of content.

I am sure our state department and military discuss the piracy issue
regularly with their colleagues in other nations. I doubt the ideas of a
former marine reservist who never attended college or even got an
overseas posting are of much interest.

I don't think Obama, Clinton or Holder really care about the piracy
issue except that it is a public relations issue. They see it as
corporate America getting what's coming to them from an ass backwards
nation.

On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:54:35 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article , payer3389
says...

On 3/1/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.




That's just stupid.

What is your proposal?


I'd make it 102 miles, just in case their gps's broke. That's a much more humane
way to approach the problem.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:39:28 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.



You could even refine that and say "in the shipping lanes". Let
fishermen have 99.% of the ocean and block off the lanes where the
ships go. That would also make your surveillance requirements less.

We don't seem to have problems declaring "no fly zones" in sovereign
countries, why not declare "merchant ship only" zones. If Wayne wants
to sail there, he files a float plan and he can go. In fact there
would be people watching out for him.

I bet the owner of that super tanker would be very happy to spend the
extra few minutes filing a float plan in exchange for being in
protected waters

And it would be even easier if they profiled too. For instance if you
know where the usual productive fishing areas are, you can assume boats
there are fishing... Don't run the shipping lanes there. Have the ships
moving check in and out as BAR suggested. If you all of a sudden have a
fishing boat, in an area not known for any decent fishing at all, or
moving toward the shipping lanes, check them out a bit.. Maybe keep an
eye on them or let them know you are curious about their activity. This
could be done in several unobtrusive ways I would imagine, in the even
they are serious fishermen looking for new grounds...

On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 15:45:56 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:39:28 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...
The problem is the cost and time on station. We need a base within
operating range of the area. A predator costs about $4.5 million and has
a 24 hour fuel load before it becomes an anchor. They have a 2000 mile
radius but that means you have to get it there, do you operating and
then get back to land. And, with a 135 MPH you would need to have
several aloft at a time.

I still say profiling is the answer. You have profilers that know the
fishing grounds and patterns. We can watch a lot of vessels in theater.
When you see "fishing boats" that are not following the profile, or are
suspect based on that profile, you put a couple extra sets of eyes on
them. If they launch out small skiffs or show themselves moving away
from a fishing area toward a ship, or shipping area, you start to move
an asset like predator drone closer and watch them more. If you see that
skiff moving toward another vessel, and then get a SOS from that vessel,
you can pretty much just let that predator vaporize the skiffs before
they get off that first RPG, and then go address the mother ship, and
address I mean vaporize them too...

Any skiff or open boat more than 100 miles from shore will be summarily
sunk.



You could even refine that and say "in the shipping lanes". Let
fishermen have 99.% of the ocean and block off the lanes where the
ships go. That would also make your surveillance requirements less.

We don't seem to have problems declaring "no fly zones" in sovereign
countries, why not declare "merchant ship only" zones. If Wayne wants
to sail there, he files a float plan and he can go. In fact there
would be people watching out for him.

I bet the owner of that super tanker would be very happy to spend the
extra few minutes filing a float plan in exchange for being in
protected waters

And it would be even easier if they profiled too. For instance if you
know where the usual productive fishing areas are, you can assume boats
there are fishing... Don't run the shipping lanes there. Have the ships
moving check in and out as BAR suggested. If you all of a sudden have a
fishing boat, in an area not known for any decent fishing at all, or
moving toward the shipping lanes, check them out a bit.. Maybe keep an
eye on them or let them know you are curious about their activity. This
could be done in several unobtrusive ways I would imagine, in the even
they are serious fishermen looking for new grounds...

Shoot, I think a few .50 cal tracers over their bow would be plenty unobtrusive.