I only saw the last half hour, cause thats when I found out it was on… but it was insane.
They talked about how terrorists are taking the methods of pirates, and saying a sea-born attack is “inevitable.” They also pointed out how easy it would be for a water based attack, and how it has happened before, and will happen again, most likely on much larger scales.
One of the examples were ships that transport LNR (I think?) natural gas, thirty thousand gallons at a time. If a terrorist was able to get anywhere near the ship, with a smaller vessel loaded with explosives, it will ultimately be a scaled down nuclear bomb.
…pretty eye opening.
I’m going to look on historychannel.com and see if its going to be aired again. If you have the time, I’d suggest watching it. It was one of the most interesting, eye opening things I’ve ever seen.
[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Did anyone catch this on the history channel?
I only saw the last half hour, cause thats when I found out it was on… but it was insane.
They talked about how terrorists are taking the methods of pirates, and saying a sea-born attack is “inevitable.” They also pointed out how easy it would be for a water based attack, and how it has happened before, and will happen again, most likely on much larger scales.
One of the examples were ships that transport LNR (I think?) natural gas, thirty thousand gallons at a time. If a terrorist was able to get anywhere near the ship, with a smaller vessel loaded with explosives, it will ultimately be a scaled down nuclear bomb.
…pretty eye opening.
I’m going to look on historychannel.com and see if its going to be aired again. If you have the time, I’d suggest watching it. It was one of the most interesting, eye opening things I’ve ever seen.[/quote]
They hold A LOT more then 30K gals. They hold millions of gallons I think. The force, if it was ignited, would be enormous.
Commercial vessels are not armed but are difficult to take down while at sea. They are high…and very fast. Not impossible to do though I’ll bet.
I’m suprised something like this hasn’t happened yet.
I’m not sure all that is feasible with today’s technology.
If you’ve got only a small ship, then you’ve got limited range. If you’re going to “scour the seas,” you’ll need a sizeable vessel. The ocean is a big place, you’re not going to cross it in a dingy loaded with explosives.
From that, we deduce that you’d get “hot zones” near the coasts, which could be patrolled by jets or Coast Guard. You could also use satellite surveillance and even underwater sensor arrays to detect and intercept “threats” before they can come close enough to detonate. If all that wasn’t enough, you could eventually arm the most tempting targets with missiles or torpedoes so that they could defend themselves in case of attack.
Personally, I don’t see it happening. Maybe a few isolated incidents (like the USS Cole), but not on a wide scale. Too many of the advantages the pirates of old enjoyed have been eliminated by technology.
[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Did anyone catch this on the history channel?
I only saw the last half hour, cause thats when I found out it was on… but it was insane.
They talked about how terrorists are taking the methods of pirates, and saying a sea-born attack is “inevitable.” They also pointed out how easy it would be for a water based attack, and how it has happened before, and will happen again, most likely on much larger scales.
One of the examples were ships that transport LNR (I think?) natural gas, thirty thousand gallons at a time. If a terrorist was able to get anywhere near the ship, with a smaller vessel loaded with explosives, it will ultimately be a scaled down nuclear bomb.
…pretty eye opening.
I’m going to look on historychannel.com and see if its going to be aired again. If you have the time, I’d suggest watching it. It was one of the most interesting, eye opening things I’ve ever seen.[/quote]
I saw that one a while ago. I think the most immediate issue it presented was the possibility of scuttling a ship in Hormuz or Malacca rather than the suicide ship scenario.
I could be wrong on this since I don’t know the technical details, but I would imagine that getting a “scaled down nuclear bomb” like explosion out of an LNG tanker would be difficult due to the need to get a proper fuel/air mixture in order for it to actually explode.
[quote]etaco wrote:
rrjc5488 wrote:
Did anyone catch this on the history channel?
I only saw the last half hour, cause thats when I found out it was on… but it was insane.
They talked about how terrorists are taking the methods of pirates, and saying a sea-born attack is “inevitable.” They also pointed out how easy it would be for a water based attack, and how it has happened before, and will happen again, most likely on much larger scales.
One of the examples were ships that transport LNR (I think?) natural gas, thirty thousand gallons at a time. If a terrorist was able to get anywhere near the ship, with a smaller vessel loaded with explosives, it will ultimately be a scaled down nuclear bomb.
…pretty eye opening.
I’m going to look on historychannel.com and see if its going to be aired again. If you have the time, I’d suggest watching it. It was one of the most interesting, eye opening things I’ve ever seen.
I saw that one a while ago. I think the most immediate issue it presented was the possibility of scuttling a ship in Hormuz or Malacca rather than the suicide ship scenario.
I could be wrong on this since I don’t know the technical details, but I would imagine that getting a “scaled down nuclear bomb” like explosion out of an LNG tanker would be difficult due to the need to get a proper fuel/air mixture in order for it to actually explode.[/quote]
I think you are right on this. I’m sure those vessels are designed not to explode and have a lot of redundant safety measures to make sure that doesn’t happen. Possible but very difficult.
[quote]hedo wrote:
I think you are right on this. I’m sure those vessels are designed not to explode and have a lot of redundant safety measures to make sure that doesn’t happen. Possible but very difficult.[/quote]
Although the economic and environmental disruption from sinking a dozen super tankers would be quite disruptive in itself.
Even if you could get the boats to detonate like a nuclear bomb (which you can’t), you don’t get much from that bang if you do it in the middle of the ocean.
[quote]pookie wrote:
If you’ve got only a small ship, then you’ve got limited range. If you’re going to “scour the seas,” you’ll need a sizeable vessel. The ocean is a big place, you’re not going to cross it in a dingy loaded with explosives.
[/quote]
[quote]Vyapada wrote:
pookie wrote:
If you’ve got only a small ship, then you’ve got limited range. If you’re going to “scour the seas,” you’ll need a sizeable vessel. The ocean is a big place, you’re not going to cross it in a dingy loaded with explosives.
How about a light aircraft?[/quote]
How light? How fast? If you want to intercept in the middle of the ocean, you need impressive range. If you target closer to the coasts, you can use a lighter plane, but then you have to deal with more countermeasures, as coasts have patrols, airports, radar, etc.
Light aircrafts could also be knocked out of the sky using missiles.
A few attacks are a definite possibility. One problem would probably be, like 9/11, that once you’ve pulled it off successfully, the various authorities will put measures in place to prevent its happening again. That’s why I don’t think we’ll see a new age of piratery dawn upon us. A few isolated incidents? Possibly. Enough to entirely disrupt naval transport as we know it? I don’t see it.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Enough to entirely disrupt naval transport as we know it? I don’t see it.
[/quote]
Fair comment.
Just a curious question on my behalf actually - I know quite little about international shipping patterns - given that quite a few light aircraft (which is a class of aircraft) have ranges of over 1000 kms I thought it might be a possibility.
Just a curious question on my behalf actually - I know quite little about international shipping patterns - given that quite a few light aircraft (which is a class of aircraft) have ranges of over 1000 kms I thought it might be a possibility.[/quote]
It is definitely a possibility. But that aircraft has to take off from somewhere, undetected and remain undetected until it reaches its target. In today’s world, evading surveillance is a lot harder than when the pirates of old where scouring the seas. (Well, mostly the Carribeans, but still…)
There’s also the factor of how much payload you can put on that plane. If you load it up to it’s max capacity, you might greatly reduce the maximal range. The closest that brings you back to the coasts, the higher the difficulty.
Like I said, I could see it happening a few times, but once the modus operandi is known, the various authorities will take steps to prevent its reoccurrence.
A light plane is no match (slow, no countermeasures) for even the cheapest SAM missile.