On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:31:01 -0500, BAR wrote:

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.


Sounds fine to me. I just don't think it's priority one.