Slashdot Mirror
Air Cannon Ties Pirates In Knots
Hugh Pickens writes "Numerous high-tech devices have been proposed to help ships cope with piracy on the high seas. Now a company has developed a ship-borne launching device that fires a net or coiled rope into the path of pirate vessels using compressed air with a range of up to a range of 400m. The payload net or rope, which has a parachute attached to the end, will unravel and lay out across the surface of the water so that as the pirate boat travels through the water its propeller shaft will pick up the line and become entangled. 'With the trials and testing we've done, it has taken us some 45 minutes to cut and disentangle the line from the propeller itself,' says Jonathan Delf. 'Within that time of course, the target ship is on its way and hopefully help has arrived in the form of naval forces or helicopter support.' The system can be fired up to five times off just a cylinder of air like a simple scuba tank." The video mentions that the device can also fire a payload of golf balls. The systems have recently been sold to "several large shipping companies that travel near the oil-rich Nigerian Delta, which, like the Somalian coast, is rife with piracy."
when the pirates use this on ships themselves?
Just shoot the fuckers already. Pretty soon there won't be any more of them.
I think the number of pirates would be reduced if the shipping vessels had small autocannons mounted on them. No jalopie fishing trawler can take a burst of 35mm AP shells for very long. Problem solved.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Are we really that politically correct now that even killing a pirate is wrong?
Pirates. Not a down-trodden minority.
Kill them. All of them.
It's the right thing to do.
Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
What is going to keep the pirates from using something like this to their advantage?
The same thing that keeps car thieves from slashing the tires of cars they plan to steal.
Many countries have laws against commercial ships carrying weapons under their flag. And even more countries have laws against armed foreign-flagged ships docking at their ports. It gets real complex real fast. Non-lethal weapons keep a captain or shipping line's options open.
Self defense its self is politically incorrect these days...
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
No, but most countries aren't going to let your ship in their waters let alone to dock in their ports if it is loaded out with machine guns and torpedoes.
And shooting fisherman whom you mistake for pirates in generally frowned upon.
Just shoot the fuckers already. Pretty soon there won't be any more of them.
If it's always clear weather, and daytime, and all the boats have transponders so that you never make errors in identifying which boats are pirate and which aren't, that might be reasonable.
If you are, say, reliable 99% of the time... and, say, one boat out of two hundred is a pirate-- you'll be shooting two innocent fishermen for every pirate.
And it's always harder to identify the bad guys in the real world than it is in the movies.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
No.
There's no trick to it.
If you're approaching a large commercial ship of any kind, plying its trade in the waters off the coast of East Africa, and you continue to ignore the many and varied warnings to do otherwise, you deserve to get shot. The innocent people you're concocting out of thin air for the sake of juvenile, devil's advocate, argumentation... is breathtakingly naive.
I have a feeling you're a part of the Confetti Generation.
Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
The tipoff would probably when they start coming at you with highspeed boats (they only use slower larger "fishing boats" as motherships, they need small highspeed boats to catch their prey) and start firing warning shots with machine guns and RPGs.
The real reason they are not using real weapons against the pirates isn't because the couldn't be sure they were shooting the right people, but rather because docking at ports becomes much more complicated legally when you are carrying weapons.
"linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
Arm the crew when they get into hostile waters. Put the arms under lock and key when they leave hostile waters.
Announce before entering a port that you have weapons, but they are locked up. Let the harbor pilot have the key and verify weapons are secure before allowing the vessel into port. Then get the key back when existing the harbor.
That's a bad idea. Typically the pirates don't kill the crew. If you started having hostile crews using lethal force against pirates, you may see the pirates escalate their attack and use more deadly force. In the end everyone loses.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
How difficult would it be to equip ships with Browning M2 .50 machine guns and man a watch for incoming pirate vessels. The Browning M2, with an maximum effective range of 1.2 miles, could turn those pirate skiffs into driftwood long before the pirates were in AK-47 or RPG range. Shoot em full of holes and leave them for the sharks; when word gets around the piracy doesn't pay, the pirates will forced to give up or be killed. From all appearances the pirates are in it for the money so they will give up if piracy doesn't pay; after all, dead men tell no tales and spend no money.
You say that as though (a) the pirates didn't already bring weapons into it, and (b) there really are no other options for the pirates. (a) they have, and (b) I don't know the situation well enough to comment (and I doubt that you do, either). However, you also seem to skip something: if one enters priracy - the use of deadly force to steal stuff - one is explicitly accepting the risks that go along with it: death induced by those who fight back.
A cheap, simple, easily fabricated cage around the prop solves this for the pirates.
Design it so the rope/net just slides below the prop. It'll add some drag, slowing them down a bit, which may help, but a larger engine solves that.
Just another corp' making money from fear, while providing no real protection.
If they are firing on you, they are a legitimate target both from a moral standpoint but also in terms of maritime law. I'm not saying that cargo ships should urn around firing on any boat they see. However, if a boat fires upon them, which this pirates do, they should be allowed to return fire. Doesn't really matter who the people in the boat are or claim to be, there is no reason for them to open fire without provocation.
That's what you have to remember. It isn't as though the pirates show up with fishing rods and politely ask to come on board. Were that the case, well nothing would happen as the cargo ship would continue on its way. They come up and open fire on the ship, generally with AK47s and RPGs. This doesn't do much to the ship, a cargo ship's hull can take a hell of a lot more than that, but is rather dangerous to the crew. I think the crew should be able to shoot back.
Or against Japanese whaling protest ships.
John
Q: So - you saw the boat approach. It had people inside and you could see they were armed. They opened fire with warning shots over your boat. You looked through the scope of your rifle at the shooter. What did you feel?
A: The recoil of my rifle.
If I was in a 30ft yacht or a 500m container ship, if someone approached my ship on the high seas, I would be VERY wary, and the instant anyone tried anything rash, I would instantly perforate them with overwhelming firepower, especially if I was in a small boat, as I would feel much more vulnerable. If I'm in a small private boat, I am NOT in the mood for taking visitors in the middle of the ocean of any size or variety and would consider ANY such visitor a threat. If I am in a giant commercial ship, I am ONLY interested in properly flagged and responding government vessels coming for a visit. The rest are either pirates or Darwinbait.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
So they had water cannons, noise makers, and now a flippin' rope cannon? Give those ships real guns with real bullets already! These pirates mean business. Any resistance these pirates meet is often returned with lethal force. Giving in to them and paying ransom is just calling for more of the same. Pay the Danegeld and you don't get rid of the Dane.
These ships need to have weapons that can match or surpass what the pirates have. Bolt a 25 mike mike to the deck if you must. Some little ship comes screaming up to your ship with guys carrying machine guns and rocket launchers shooting at you then its weapons free. They understand return fire. Make it too difficult to be worth their time and the piracy will stop.
All of this less than lethal crap has got to end. Give those ships real guns with real bullets!
Yep, I'm a bit perturbed over this. All this politically correct crap is getting people killed.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
If I commandeered a shipping vessel and if I had a choice between (1) some flying rope that can be shot out of an air cannon and (2) on-board artillery like a machine gun (or something that can blast a hole in an on-coming vessel), I would rather choose the artillery. The problem with this flying rope is that it might enrage the pirate, and he might aim his artillery at you and also signal for assistance. If his comrades arrive at the scene, then your flying rope will not stop the thugs from putting a bullet in your head.
I would too. Unfortunately, many countries into whose ports (and hence sovereign territory) you might with to sail might take issue with a cargo ship with a machine gun on it. They might even insist that you receive clearance as a military vessel or put other bureaucratic hurdles in the way. Remember, any delay costs you at least $50k an day in lost time, aside from the actual expense of dealing with it. It would be nice if there was a uniform agreement on the armament of cargo ships that exempted such things from local law* but there just isn't. A ship that makes multiple port calls is going to need to hire a lawyer from each country just to ensure compliance.
* For instance, if you were a crewman storing a rifle or pistol in your quarters while making a stop in the lovely Port of Boston, you would be guilty of possessing a firearm without a license. I'm sure the authorities aren't keen on enforcing that law but that such conduct is technically criminal since there is no exemption.
Are we really that politically correct now that even killing a pirate is wrong?
Oh you can kill them but there are a few things to consider first:
That said if you can shoot them dead, I'm pretty sure no one will mind. Provided you are in international waters AND you can prove your case that you didn't just murder someone AND you can explain why your ship is armed AND you can somehow figure out a way to kill a group of pirates that out numbers yours and is probably better armed.
I don't know about you, but being an American I would rather take my chances in a gun battle with the pirates (a rail mounted Browning M2 heavy machine gun would be very useful against pirates armed with AK-47s and RPGs fired from small skiffs) than be taken as a hostage back to Somalia where any Americans will almost certainly be turned over to the local Islamic militias and beheaded. In fact, after the incident with the Maersk Alabama the Somali pirates have already threatned to do just that.
That's a bad idea. Typically the pirates don't kill the crew. If you started having hostile crews using lethal force against pirates, you may see the pirates escalate their attack and use more deadly force. In the end everyone loses.
On the other hand, escalating it so the pirates have the potential of a real consequence (death versus sent back to shore with a slap on the wrist) is exactly what needs to happen. It would discourage them from trying to make easy money by being pirates, and put pressure on the vritually non-exist govt of their contries to do something about the problem.
Most of the people doing the actual "pirating" have been pushed to it by their government. The source of the problem isn't greed, it's necessity (with a decent payoff, too).
No, Somalia hasn't had an effective government in almost 20 years. If they had, there would be police and coast guard and someone to answer for the pirates. Territories are controlled by warlords, plain and simple.
They may have been pushed into piracy by their local warlords - by the lack of government, if you will, but not by the Somalian government.
But no matter why they became pirates, they are still pirates, and they deserve the same fate as pirates throughout history. Swift, irreversible justice. Doesn't matter if they're volunteers or conscripts, on drugs, just kids, old fishermen, or whatever -- they've all proven themselves by heading out to sea to commit murder. For each pirate sent to the bottom of the sea, the people back home become a little more scared, and a little less willing to head out on another attack.
The sea is a lot more brutal and less policed than Central Park, and things don't turn out nice and neat like a cop booking a mugger.
John
Before you attempt to kill them, you have to be certain that they are a pirate. Legally certain, not just Slashdot certain.
As a general rule of thumb, there are three things that need to happen before deadly force is justified:
Pirates approaching a boat armed with AK-47s have met all three of those variables. They have the ability and opportunity to do the crew harm and have demonstrated an intent to do so. Under the laws of most nations you are entitled to respond with deadly force in such a scenario.
Fouling their prop doesn't require quite such a high standard of proof, and gets the job done
Yes it does. You can't just disable boats on the open ocean and leave their crews at the mercy of the sea and elements.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
The US military has alread killed the pirates out of necessity; the United States has a long term policy of not negotiating with terrorists, hijackers, or hostage takers. Appeasment only makes the aggressor more aggressive and paying ransoms is not good long term policy. The horse is out of the barn on this one and Americans should avoid capture by Somali pirates at any price. Remember that it is the Somali pirates who are the villains in this business, they attacked first and the US Navy responded in kind. They got what was coming to them.
Yes, it would. A semi-automatic rifle is exactly what you want for this. You've got guys in an open boat within a few hundred yards of you. Nice clear line of sight. A fully automatic weapon is just going to waste ammo. The only real use for full auto is suppression -- and that really isn't in the cards on the open ocean.
Shotguns would also be useful. Sometimes the pirates like to sneak aboard ship in the dark or during bad weather. The shotgun is the perfect weapon for that type of fighting.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
But internal polling among Nautilus members has indicated a "hardening of attitudes" in recent months, with more calling for armed protection, Linington said.
Meaning what? 5 people thought it was a good idea before and 10 do now? The article conveniently provides no actual numbers or data - merely a vague assertion about "hardening of attitudes" that could mean almost anything. Nice sound bite though.
There has always been discussion about it. Doesn't mean it's a good idea or that any reputable shipping companies are spending a lot of time on the problem. Right now it's pretty clear that arming merchant ships is a waste of resources on an insignificant problem. A problem to watch carefully I'll grant but nothing more.
I have some experience in this area.. what we had were the double mounted Ma Duece's, Mark 19's, and 25mm AntiAir. Regardless, people are right when they say the issue is that countries all over are strict about weapons at port. I did an escort up the Suez once and when we got to Greece someone didn't do the right paperwork, so we had to send two of the crew with all the weapons and ammo to spain!
"It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
I don't understand why everybody is hung up on this fear of 'making mistakes'. Why is it every time that somebody suggests arming potential victims somebody else comes along and starts worrying about friendly fire? It rarely works out that way in the real world. It's even less likely in a maritime setting.
Just stop and think about it for a moment. Small craft do not follow merchant ships around for no reason. They have a pretty good incentive to steer clear of them. When approached, the merchant ship will respond with a hailing device. If it's some innocent situation then this fact will be discovered fairly quickly. If the small craft is filled with guys armed with AK-47s whom match every change in course then it's a fairly safe assumption that they have nefarious intent.
Putting arms in the hands of the good guys does not turn them into trigger happy nutjobs that kill random innocent people at the slightest provocation. The three concepts that I outlined above are standard operating procedure for police departments and armed civilians around the world. This isn't rocket science.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Fortunately he found the only found the only merchant ship within 50 nautical miles and was sailing to it to ask for help.
With a rocket launcher?
"Just another corp' making money from fear, while providing no real protection"
when you stop thinking, and depend upon stereotypes of behavior to describe the world around you, you defeat your own ideology by making yourself look brainless. fact #1: prop fouling is a valid tactic that works, and you say as much in your own comment. fact #2: there are real threats in this world, such as pirates off somalia
are pirates off somalia baseless fearmongering by big media to scare clueless fools... or real entities? then what the hell is "Just another corp' making money from fear" suppose to mean? pffft
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I think the weapons lockers would be just fine. Restrict access to the captain and one or two of the other senior crew. We trust these guys to pilot tens of thousands of tons of steel without killing anyone. We can trust them with a few small arms.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
From now on, whenever you think "lethal weapons on civilian ships would stop piracy", I want you to consider that this is the same as "lots of armed Chinese marines in Los Angeles Harbor would stop piracy". Then put yourself in the shoes of a President trying to push some kind of international convention permitting that.
Thank you.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
When will you yanks learn that just throwing guns at a problem always makes it worse not better.
When you bring guns, they just bring bigger guns. And bombs and missiles. Just remember, pirates aren't going to give a crap about the same rules that limit what firepower a legal vessel can carry.
You start firing back, the pirates will just tool up with bigger guns and perhaps with RPGs etc. They will also reduce risk to themselves by shooting first instead of giving the crew a chance to surrender. They could just adopt a strategy of sinking boats first then taking whatever survivors a.k.a hostages are left from the sea.
Explain how is that better?
A ... gunslinging person. Please don't interfere with international politics.
All outcomes in politics, international or otherwise, are determined by the gun slingers.
Ghandi was shot, India is now a nuclear armed country. Pacifist sentiments indicate a lack of real-world understanding. Pacifism is the stuff of fairy tales.
First, this isn't about war in the middle east. Nobody here is advocating starting a war while actively avoiding military service.
Second, the pirates are aggressors. Slashdotters aren't suggesting merchants go out and hunt pirates, they're debating the merits of shooting back, and with what.
No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
When you bring guns, they just bring bigger guns. And bombs and missiles. Just remember, pirates aren't going to give a crap about the same rules that limit what firepower a legal vessel can carry.
It's not a matter of throwing guns at them, it's a matter of throwing money at them.
To capture an unarmed vessel with 30 to 50 people on it, you need what, 5 or 6 people with assault rifles loaded in a fast skiff?
If we can deter those 5 or 6 people, they need more boats. If we can sink their skiffs, they need bigger or armored attack vessels. That one jump in cost alone takes the investment from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars, and smaller cuts for the pirates.
Granted, the simplest solution is to run convoys through the areas where pirates tend to congregate and give them armed escorts. If the pirates are fool enough to attack, well, that sounds like a problem solving itself.
You start firing back, the pirates will just tool up with bigger guns and perhaps with RPGs etc. They will also reduce risk to themselves by shooting first instead of giving the crew a chance to surrender. They could just adopt a strategy of sinking boats first then taking whatever survivors a.k.a hostages are left from the sea.
This reminds me of the accepted protocol for airplane hostage-taking about a decade ago. The idea was to just keep calm and wait for the government to pay the ransom or whatever. Have you noticed how people find that idea laughable post-9/11? One ship gets sunk by pirates and that game is quickly over. The force that will be applied against would-be pirates will be overwhelming and devastating.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
"When will you yanks learn that just throwing guns at a problem always makes it worse not better."
You're so right. After all, guns did nothing to stop the Nazis. If the crews of the captured ships just sat down nicely with the duly elected pirate representatives and met their perfectly reasonable requests to kidnap you and take your ship and cargo then I'm sure any remaining survivors would walk away happy.
"When you bring guns, they just bring bigger guns. And bombs and missiles. Just remember, pirates aren't going to give a crap about the same rules that limit what firepower a legal vessel can carry."
Yes, and before you know it all the pirates will have nuclear dreadnoughts and orbital particle cannons. Oh the humanity!
Or maybe they'd realize that getting shot and drowning at sea is a lot more likely than getting rich. And, being poor and unable to buy the latest Stark Industries weapons technology from the local Pirates R' Us, they'd find something better to do.
Hey, maybe I'm wrong. Either way, your suggested strategy of letting violent criminals do anything they want because stopping them might make them angry seems, well, unproductive.