Maritime Security: Robo Marine Security Helicopters - Testing Against Pirates

ONR image

Another tool in the maritime security kit- if it works - as set out in this Office of Naval Research press release, "Pirates, Beware: Navy’s Smart Robocopters Will Spy You in the Crowd":

Navy unmanned aircraft will be able to distinguish small pirate boats from other vessels when an Office of Naval Research (ONR)-funded sensor starts airborne tests this summer, officials said April 5.

Fire Scout UVAS

Called the Multi-Mode Sensor Seeker (MMSS), the sensor is a mix of high-definition cameras, mid-wave infrared sensors and laser-radar (LADAR) technology. It will be placed on a robotic helicopter called Fire Scout. Carrying advanced automatic target recognition software, the sensor prototype will allow Fire Scout to autonomously identify small boats on the water, reducing the workload of Sailors operating it from control stations aboard Navy ships.

“Sailors who control robotic systems can become overloaded with data, often sifting through hours of streaming video searching for a single ship,” said Ken Heeke, program officer in ONR’s Naval Air Warfare and Weapons Department. “The automatic target recognition software gives Fire Scout the ability to distinguish target boats in congested coastal waters using LADAR, and it sends that information to human operators, who can then analyze those vessels in a 3-D picture.”

Navy-developed target recognition algorithms aboard Fire Scout will exploit the 3-D data collected by the LADAR, utilizing a long-range, high-res, eye-safe laser. The software compares the 3-D imagery to vessel templates or schematics stored in the system’s memory.

“The 3-D data gives you a leg up on target identification,” said Dean Cook, principal investigator for the MMSS program at Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division (NAWCWD). “Infrared and visible cameras produce 2-D pictures, and objects in them can be difficult to automatically identify. With LADAR data, each pixel corresponds to a 3-D point in space, so the automatic target recognition algorithm can calculate the dimensions of an object and compare them to those in a database.”

The algorithms have been successfully tested in shore-based systems against vessels at sea. The software is being integrated into a BRITE Star II turret by a team from NAWCWD, Raytheon, FLIR Systems, BAE Systems and Utah State University for airborne testing aboard a manned test helicopter. The flight assessment will be conducted against groups of approximately seven small boats in a military sea range off the California coast later this summer.

Sounds cool. Hope it works in the real world.

Somali Pirates: The Pirates Get a Vote in Counter-Piracy

Strategy Page makes the point that for every announced counter-piracy move there's a counter counter-piracy move, especially when if the pirates are media savvy - as set out in Sea Transportation: Pirates Preparing For The Worst.

Followed to its logical extreme, saying "There is no easy solution to the Somali pirates" is to acknowledge that the real solutions to Somali are hard - - because these answers involve killing people and breaking things.

If the counter-piracy forces are more afraid of bad publicity than they are willing to pay this hard price, then we might as well just bundle up a few million dollars every year and start paying "tribute" to the pirates to buy them off and cut out the pretense of fighting pirates using military force. It would probably prove cheaper in the long run.

Speaking of responses to piracy, if you go here, you can read a presentation by Andrew J. Shapiro, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, to the Center for American Progress on 27 Mar 2012, after a discussion of how piracy was "snowballing" during the administration in office prior to the current one and making a list of the international diplomatic and military efforts set in place (during which time the piracy continued to "snowball"), he hits on a key to the slowing of successful piracy of bigger ships due to the efforts of - well, you can guess - :

However, we must also recognize that even when fully implemented best management practices do not guarantee security from pirates. As a result, we have also supported the maritime industry’s use of additional measures to enhance their security – such as having armed security teams on board. To date, not a single ship with Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel aboard has been pirated. Not one.

These teams serve as a potential game-changer in the effort to counter-piracy. While many expected these teams to be made up of undisciplined “cowboys” that would cause an increase in the violence at sea, from what we have seen so far this has not been the case. We have not seen cases of pitched battles at sea between pirates and armed security personnel. In fact, in most engagements, the situation ends as soon as pirates are aware an armed security team is on board. In most cases, as pirates approach a ship the armed security teams will use flares or loudspeakers to warn the pirates. If the pirates keep coming, they will fire warning shots. That is usually when the interaction ends. Pirates break off the attack and turn their skiffs around and wait for another less protected ship to come by. These teams therefore have served as an effective deterrent.

To his credit, Mr. Shapiro also gets it right on the impact "mother-ships":

This demonstrates how pirates are constantly adapting their tactics in response to international efforts. One example of this is their expanded use of mother-ships – which are themselves pirated ships with hostage crews aboard. These ships launch and re-supply groups of pirates who use smaller, faster boats for attacks. They can carry dozens of pirates and tow many skiffs for multiple simultaneous attacks. This has made pirates more difficult to interdict and more effective at operating during monsoon season, which previously restricted their activities. Mother-ships have extended the pirates’ reach far beyond the Somali Basin. Somali pirates now operate in a total sea space of approximately 2.5 million square nautical miles – an area equivalent to the size of the continental United States. Pirate activity has even extended as far as the waters off the coast of India. This increase makes it difficult for naval or law enforcement ships and other assets to reach the scene of a pirate attack quickly enough to disrupt an ongoing attack. There is just too much water to patrol. (emphasis added)

Well, then he describes one part of the effort to shrink this "water":

Since discovering the use of mother-ships, international navies now seek to identify and interdict mother-ships when possible.

Well, as I have said before "shrink the ocean" available to the pirates by Make the Somali pirates’ sea smaller…. Yes, Somalia has a long coast line, but it is clear that not all that coast is used by pirates - in fact, we have long known the bases from which the majority of pirates operate.

I suspect that knowledge is one of the factors in the EU's announcement that the counter-pirate fight will be taken ashore . . .

Oh, and from the ICC CSS IMB Live Piracy Map, a look at the pirate's efforts so far in 2012 in the Indian Ocean and its tributaries:

 Finally, from the NATO Shipping Center, pirate activity over the last 3 months:

That yellow bar over there in the Gulf of Aden is the "transit lane."

Somali Pirates: Send Them Toward Home Without Any Trophies

An EU effort "catches and releases" a Somali pirate team as reported here:

EU Counter Piracy Naval Forces (EUNAVFOR) have tracked down and stopped a group of suspected pirates who were believed to have tried to attack a Hong-Kong flagged tanker approximately 400 nautical miles off the coast of Somalia.

FS Aconit

Luxembourg MPRA (EUNAVFOR photo)

EU Naval Force warship FS Aconit was called to investigate after the tanker came under attack on 26 March 2012. Aconit was directed onto the fleeing pirates by a Luxembourgish Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft (MPRA), which have recently completed 3500 Flights Hours with EUNAVFOR.

The MPRA quickly located the suspects who were towing a small skiff behind a larger sea going whaler. The MPRA provided imagery showing pirate paraphernalia.

In order to conceal the evidence of their piracy activities, it is believed that the suspected pirates had cut loose and sunk the smaller skiff, containing weapons, ladders and a certain amount of fuel.

Aconit boarding teams investigating suspect whaler (EUNAVFOR photo)

Aconit’s helicopter intercepted and stopped the whaler, which had 10 suspected pirates onboard, by firing warning shots on 27 March 2012. A team from Aconit boarded the whaler and the suspects have been transferred on board the frigate. Two suspects received medical care by the Aconit’s medical service.

As no pirate paraphernalia was recovered the crew of the Whaler were sent back to the Somali coast with only enough water and fuel for a one-way journey.

The French Navy frigate Aconit’s intervention made it possible to hamper the action of a complete pirate action group, thus preventing them from committing new attacks in the area.

Apparently no trophies were awarded to the pirates for the "good effort" or for their "cooperation" in deep-sixing their pirate tools.

We are left to contemplate a long voyage in an open boat . . .

Somali Pirates: A German Look at Inshore/Ashore Counter-Piracy

Well, if the Somali pirates read der Speigel, they will know how far to nest off the beach, as set out in here, that distance is 2 klicks/km or 1.2 miles:

Last Friday, EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels agreed to expand the operation to include the coastal region. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, the ministers agreed that Atalanta units should be able to target pirates and their infrastructure up to a limit of two kilometers (1.2 miles) inland. If the expansion is approved, it will be the first time that Western forces are allowed to target pirates on the Somali mainland.

The last sentence is not entirely accurate. It is clear that France took forces ashore to whack some pirate thugs 4 years back (see here and here), the U.S. has, on occasion, gone inland to rescue hostages (see here, and there are - rumors - that other countries have had forces doing stuff off the water.

Still, 2 km is progress of sorts in taking the counter-piracy op ashore. In an earlier report in which the Germans revealed "consideration" of taking the fight ashore (see here), there was this whining noise:

Omid Nouripour, the defense spokesman for the Green Party's parliamentary group, was even more outspoken. He called the idea of targeting the pirates' onshore facilities "sheer madness." He spoke of the danger of mission creep should the pirates retreat further onshore in response to attacks.

And my suggestion of a suitable strike distance - somewhat deeper than 2 km:

Someone ought to explain to Omid Nouripour the difficulties imposed on the pirates by making them perform logistics 100 miles from the beach.

Somali Pirates: EU to take the fight ashore?

Interesting report, and about damn time, as it appears that the EU to back strikes on Somali pirates:

The European Union will probably approve plans on Friday to strike Somali pirate equipment on beaches, widening the scope of its naval operations four years into a mission to protect shipping.
***
"Military officers say they want to render harmless the ships on the beach that could be used. This was a convincing argument," German deputy defence minister Christian Schmidt said after a meeting of EU defence chiefs in Brussels.
***
Warships and helicopters will have "very well defined conditions" for firing at pirate equipment in order to avoid harming people, a European official said, noting that Germany and other nations wanted strict rules of engagement.

Now I'll be waiting to see how Friday's vote goes. But if it goes as indicated above - well, hot dang!

UPDATE: EU Extends Counter Piracy Mission Off Coast of Somalia :

On Friday 23 March 2012 the Council of the European Union confirmed its intention to extend the EU Naval Force (EU NAVFOR) counter-piracy mission, Operation ATLANATA off the Somali coast until December 2014. At the same time the Council also extended the area of operations to include Somali coastal territory and internal waters. Today’s decision will enable Operation Atalanta Forces to work directly with the Transitional Federal Government and other Somali entities to support their fight against piracy in the coastal areas. In accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, the Somali government has notified the UN Secretary General of its acceptance of the EU’s offer for this new collaboration.

Let the suppression of the Somali pirates begin!

And follow up with a mandatory blockade in which every boat leaving Somalia must get clearance before leaving Somali waters or face being sunk without warning.

Somali Pirates: "Piracy fighters use floating armories"

As noted in my chapter, "Legal Considerations for Private Naval Company Armed Anti-Piracy Escorts," in the new book Maritime Private Security: Market responses to piracy, terrorism and waterborne security risks in the 21st century, one of many challenges facing maritime private security companies is the restrictions placed on weapon transportation and the dangers a variety of laws pose to the armed teams.

One way around these laws is to keep the weapons at sea. This logical step is now being taken - as the AP reports: "Piracy fighters use floating armories":

Private security firms are storing their guns aboard floating armories in international waters so ships that want armed anti-piracy guards for East Africa's pirate-infested waters can cut costs and circumvent laws limiting the import and export of weapons, industry officials say.

Companies and legal experts say the operation of the armories is a "legal gray area" because few, if any, governments have laws governing the practice. Some security companies have simply not informed the governments of the flag their ship is flying, industry officials said.
***
Storing guns on boats offshore really took off as a business last year. Britain — where many of the operators are from — is investigating the legality of the practice, which has received little publicity outside of shipping industry circles.

There has been a discussion of what to do with weapons here for some time.

"Expanding Private Sector Partnerships Against Piracy"

From the U.S. Department of State: "Expanding Private Sector Partnerships Against Piracy":

Yet we must also recognize that best management practices do not guarantee security from pirates. Pirates operate in too large of an area for naval forces to respond quickly. The reality is that international naval forces simply might not be there to respond. The problem of piracy is one that can’t simply be solved by national governments. Therefore, we have also supported industry’s use of additional measures to ensure their security – such as the employment of armed security teams. To date, not a single ship with Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel aboard has been pirated. Not a single one.

These teams serve as a potential game-changer in the effort to counter-piracy. This is because – and as anyone in the Navy or Marines can tell you – one of the most difficult combat maneuvers to undertake is to board a ship when coming under fire. While many expected these teams to be made up of undisciplined “cowboys” that would increase the violence at sea, from what we have gathered and observed the opposite has happened. We have not seen cases of pitched battles at sea between armed security teams and pirates attempting to board under fire. In fact, in most engagements between armed security teams and pirates, the situation ends as soon as pirates are aware these teams are on board. We have found these teams to be highly professional. In most cases, as pirates approach a ship the armed security teams will use flares or loudspeakers to warn the pirates. If the pirates keep coming, they will fire warning shots. That is usually when the interaction ends. Pirates break off the attack and turn their skiffs around and wait for another less protected target.

At the State Department, we have encouraged countries to permit commercial vessels to carry armed teams. However, we do note that this is a new area, in which some practices, procedures, and regulations are still being developed. We are working through the Contact Group and the International Maritime Organization or IMO on these issues. For instance, we have advised that armed security teams be placed under the full command of the captain of the ship. The captain then is in control of the situation and is the one to authorize the use of any force. Last September, we were encouraged to see language adopted by the IMO that revised the guidance to both flag States and ship operators and owners to establish the ship’s master as being in command of these teams.

There have been some logistical and technical issues that have arisen with armed security teams – particularly relating to weapons licensing and the transit of these teams through third countries. The United States regularly works with other governments to help resolve questions on weapons licensing to facilitate compliance with the laws of individual port States as related to firearms transfer. We engage through the Contact Group and the IMO to encourage all port and coastal States to adopt legislation that is conducive to smooth, facilitated movements of security team firearms and equipment. Currently, some States present challenges in this regard by requiring transfer to a third party while a vessel is moored in a port. Others impose fee schedules that directly charge against the presence of these weapons. In response, we have demarched port and coastal States and let them know that U.S. vessels may have firearms onboard and we request that these teams and their firearms be facilitated under applicable laws. We have also worked with the Coast Guard and Department of Transportation at the IMO and through the Contact Group to further encourage port and coastal States to develop regulations that facilitate the use of these teams aboard commercial vessels. We are working hand in glove with industry in all these endeavors to ensure these teams are both properly regulated and properly equipped.

Somali Pirates: Warning of a logical extension into new hunting grounds

A suggestion of a potential area of expansion for the pirates of Somalia, should they decide to venture further into the open ocean using their "mother ships" is found at "Piracy: Cape to Arabian Gulf and Malacca Shipping Lanes Are Latest Targets", which builds off an early February 2012 hijacking:

Red arrow points to referenced 8 Feb attack

NATO has issued an alert saying that a merchant vessel was attacked yesterday (8 February 2012) and is suspected to have been hijacked. At 14h38 UTC the vessel was in position 13 32 N 058 36 E.

***

The hijacking comes on the same day that a maritime security company whose services include the provision of armed guards on ships warns of “a critical shift in pirate focus.”

GoAGT (Gulf of Aden Group Transits) said on Thursday that over the past week it has received first-hand information from sources indicating that several Pirate Action Groups (PAGs) have begun to focus operations in a new regional area. These sightings suggest that pirates are targeting the Cape to Arabian Gulf shipping lane.

“There is a potential for PAGs to move east and endanger shipping along the Cape to Malacca route,” added GoAGT. “Shipping along these routes are vulnerable as many vessels are not hardened against piracy, and do not carry armed guards. This is due to these routes being outside of the traditional High Risk Area (HRA).”

"Mothership" dhow?

GoAGT says the activity east of the Seychelles is “likely motivated by the search for unprepared shipping. The operational range for PAGs has greatly increased due to the use of mothership vessels, which allow for extended operations at sea. It is also possible that PAGs can extend operations south of the Maldives.” “On 6 February,” says GoAGT, “a merchant vessel was approached by two skiffs in the central Indian Ocean Region at position 05°03'N 066°07'E. On 8 February, a second merchant vessel was attacked at position 04°18'S 059°59'E by a skiff with five pirates on board (POB). The distance between these attacks suggests that several PAGs are now operating in this area. “With the extensive concentration of anti-piracy measures in the Northern Indian Ocean, it is increasingly likely PAGs will attempt to target new areas to take advantage of unprotected shipping lanes,” warns GoAGT.

***

Nato said piracy activities have been recently reported in the Indian Ocean in vicinity of the Seychelles Islands and warned that approaches occurred on 28 January north of the Seychelles Islands in position 0455N 05814E and on 6 February east of the Seychelles Islands in the position of 0503S 06607E. “Masters are advised to proceed through these areas with extreme caution, and be advised that the PAG (Pirate Attack Group) responsible for the recent approaches (NSC4) in the Indian Ocean is still believe to be in the area.”

Okay, GoAGT might be attempting to drum up a little business, but its point is well made. Somali pirates have shifted their attacks to areas in which coverage by naval forces has been weak or non-existent and to locales where the perceived need for shipboard armed security teams has also been low. It is logical that the pirates might shift to a sea lane which, as yet, has not been bothered by pirate attacks.

What virginal sea lanes that are within the potential reach of the Somali pirates are in danger?

 What follows is a mashup chart I created by combining a chart from a study of "The complex network of global cargo ship movements" by Pablo Kaluza, et al. with a recent IMB Live Piracy Map showing attacks to 4 March 2012 in the Indian Ocean area:

EagleSpeak Mashup Map: The more yellow the line, the more heavily traveled the sea lane 

If it looks a little fuzzy, It's because of the overlay of the maps to allow me to make my point - there a number of heavily traveled sea lanes radiating (roughly) from South Africa to India, to the Strait of Malacca and to other points in eastern Indian Ocean. Given enough of a mothership, these areas are potentially vulnerable to pirate attacks, though, to date, none has occurred along them.

Here's another liberty I have taken from the Kaluza, et al piece, in which the green oval I have added highlights the area of concern:

Having a hypotheses of a potential area of attack - and one that covers a vast area of ocean at that- what is a viable way of providing some protection for these as yet "un-pirated" sea lanes?

One thought is to use modern airships as counter-pirate tools, as set out in an earlier pos,  Fighting Pirates with Airships, an idea apparently being examined by the Royal Navy. Another possibility is to keep the Somali pirates out of these sea lanes by a vigorous containment policy, though ultimately there has to be a "risk/reward" look at the potential which ways the costs of prevention of hijackings against the cost of paying ransoms.

Somali Pirates: South Africa Prepares

South Africa to reopen Durban Navy Base for anti-pirate operations:

Arrow points to Durban

The Defence Department is taking steps to tackle piracy, and intends re-opening a former naval base on Salisbury Island, the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Lindiwe Sisulu said today.

Sisulu told a media briefing in Parliament that the Durban base had been downgraded to a naval station to save costs and operations moved to Simon’s Town, near Cape Town [in 2002].

However, the adoption of a strategy by the government to tackle piracy in its surrounding waters necessitated the re-opening of the base, she said.
***

"A" indicates Salisbury Island, Durban, RSA

At present just one frigate at a time had been deployed on anti-piracy patrol to Pemba in northern Mozambique and was supported by a number of helicopters on board the frigate as well as by ground troops.

South Africa has also signed a pact with Tanzania and Mozambique on maritime security co-operation, which would see the three countries working together to secure their respective territorial waters.

Sisulu said figures from two years ago by the International Maritime Bureau revealed that the cost of piracy was between US$7 billion and $12 billion a year. Added to this, there had been 17 acts of piracy in Tanzanian waters last year.

She said the sea was very important for trade as 91% of goods traded between African countries were transported by sea, while the continent had 44 refineries in 25 countries. This made it essential for African countries to police the continent’s waters, she said.

Frigate SAS AMATOLA

The South African Maritime Strategy - which was adopted by Cabinet last year - is being piloted by South Africa, Tanzania and Mozambique, and Sisuslu said the deployment of the Isandlwana was more of a deterrent than anything else.

She said the department would be requesting that at least two percent of GDP be allocated to defence spending.
***
The Minister of International Relations and Co-operation, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, said that to deal with piracy it was important to tackle the political problems on the ground.

Nkoana-Mashabane attended a meeting in London on Thursday, hosted by AU security-council members, on how to work together with Somalis to return the country to normalcy.

Durban is approximately 1700 nautical miles south of Mombasa, Kenya, near the Somali border, or about 2200 nm from Mogudishu, Somalia.

Somali Pirates: "Pirates kill 2 hostages on hijacked vessel" - 16 Freed by Danish Navy

Headline: "Denmark: Pirates kill 2 hostages on hijacked vessel". Rest of story reveals a rescue effort by the Danes that saved 16 hostages and prevented another Somali pirate "mothership" from getting to sea to hijack more ships:

Two hostages were killed and 16 others freed when a Danish warship intercepted a cargo vessel that had been hijacked by pirates off Somalia's coast.

Navy spokesman Kenneth Nielsen said Tuesday that 17 pirates were detained in Monday's anti-piracy operation. He declined to give the nationalities of the hostages.

HDMS Absalon

Danish ship HDMS Absalon had been following the hijacked vessel for several days, Nielsen said. The cargo ship had been used as a mothership from which pirates sailed out in smaller boats to attack other vessels.

He said HDMS Absalon intervened when the vessel tried to move away from the coast on Monday. "(It) stopped the mothership before it could become a threat against the shipping on the open sea."

Good on the Danes. Sorry for the hostage life loss, but the Somali pirates are to blame for hijacking the ship in the first place. From the Danish Navy (Google translate version):

Dnaish Navy photo of pirated vessel

ABSALON has stopped another pirate mothership The ship was stopped by ABSALON yesterday. The Danish warship Absalon has on 27 February 2012 halted a pirate mother ship. During the incident two hostages on pirate mother ship killed. ABSALON has for several days been watching a pirate mother ship off the Somali coast. Sunday night attempted pirate mother ship to sneak away from the coast. ABSALON was inserted and stopped the mother ship before it could pose a threat to shipping on the high seas. As neither the call, or cry unto warning shot to bring the pirate mother ship to a stop, was ABSALON strength of the NATO head allowed to firing equipment aboard the mother ship piracy, with a view to bringing the vessel to a stop. This fire was on board suspected pirates to surrender. ABSALON crew could then take control of the pirate mother ship. On board the pirate mother ship took ABSALON crew 17 suspected pirates and 18 hostages from the mother ship's original crew. Two hostages were found badly injured, and even with a rapid assistance from ABSALON doctor stood their life to save. The circumstances that led to the two hostages were killed is not yet known. Military Auditor Corps investigates the facts surrounding the incident. Danish authorities will, in line with the actual course of events relating to the hijacking of the mother ship clarified assess the possibilities to prosecute suspected pirates. Anyone from ABSALON's crew is in good shape.

Fighting Pirates with Airships

Ignore the Army markings, an LEMV (Northrup Grumman picture)

Royal Navy looking into bringing back an old tool as reported in 21st century airships may join Navy fleet:

Scientists from the defence company Northrop Grumman have given briefings to the Navy on the latest airship that is about to enter military service.
***
Commanders are also considering using it as a counter piracy vessel as the LEMV can lower up to 150 commandos along with their fast inflatable boats.

Travelling at over 80 knots the airship is almost three times faster than ships and the Navy’s version can travel for several days without refuelling its four gas turbine engines.

The Royal Navy is not, and should not be, the only Navy looking into this tool for the counter-pirate mission which would seem well suited to this type of aircraft. I have some more thoughts in a draft post I hope to have up tonight, schedule permitting.

Somali Pirates: Hijacked Fishing Boat Crew Casts Off Pirates, Heads for Freedom

A little anti-pirate self-help reported as Crew recapture Taiwan ship from Somali pirates:

The crew of a Taiwanese fishing vessel fought against armed Somali pirates to retake their ship after it was hijacked off East Africa, Taiwan authorities said Sunday.

The 290-tonne Chin Yi Wen with a crew of 28, including nine Chinese, eight Filipinos, six Indonesians and five Vietnamese, had been out of contact since Friday, the foreign ministry said.

But the crew managed to overwhelm the six armed pirates and retake control of their ship.

"In my memory, this is the first time sailors of a fishing vessel hijacked by Somali pirates have freed themselves on their own," Tsay Tzu-yaw, spokesman for Taiwan's Fisheries Agency, told AFP.

The Somali pirates fell into the sea,* Tsay said, quoting the fishing boat owner, adding that details of the saga and the fate of the six pirates were not immediately clear.

"Fell into the sea."

Right.






*emphasis added by me

Marine Insurers Support Armed Guards to Counter Pirates

Reported as Marine Insurers Backing Armed Guards as Piracy Threat Grows:

More ship insurers are backing the use of private armed guards on merchant vessels at sea to combat Somali piracy as attacks and the resulting costs are set to rise in coming weeks, industry officials said on Tuesday.

Pirate attacks on oil tankers and other ships are costing the world economy billions of dollars a year and navies have struggled to combat the menace, especially in the vast Indian Ocean. Seaborne gangs are set to ramp up attacks in the area after the monsoon season ends.
***

“Piracy is clogging the arteries of globalization,” said Emma Russell with underwriter Watkins, a member of the Lloyd’s of London insurance market. “No vessel with armed guards has yet been taken,” she added.

Industry delegates at the annual conference of the International Union of Maritime Insurance (IUMI) said there were more than 20,000 transits a year in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean.

Speakers at the conference said the hiring of private armed guards to accompany ships is increasingly seen as an effective deterrent against pirates and as a complement to overstretched navies, many of whom face budget cuts.

Ship owners and insurers have until recently been reluctant to accept the use of armed private contractors. They have hesitated partly due to legal liabilities and risks, including the problem of bringing weapons into some territorial waters and due to the fear of escalating violence.

The IUMI said the use of private guards should comply with the legislation of the flag state.
***
Industry group the Security Association for the Maritime Industry (SAMI), which has 58 members, is aiming to have the first companies complete an accreditation process by the second quarter of 2012, founding member Peter Cook said.

This will result in a list of audited security firms able to provide armed guards.

The end goal

Cook said private firms would play an increasing role as navies face spending reviews, citing prospects of a 30 percent decline in the size of Western navies in the next 20 years. “They’re taking the policemen off the block,” he said.

Ship owner associations, meanwhile, have called on the United Nations to create an armed military force to be deployed on vessels to counter piracy and restrict the growth of unregulated private contractors.

Let's take a look at the ship owner suggestion of a UN force - it looks to me like nothing more than an effort to push this cost onto someone else's ledger. See here.

Looks to me like a place where private enterprise, supported by realistic shipping law, can handle this quite well. Well, except for those shipping and fishing companies too poor or cheap to provide security. In which case, they may be better off purchasing "protection" from the pirates themselves.

Protection in the old "mafia" way . . .

Somali Pirates: Shipping Company Threatens to Change Flags Unless Allowed to Put "Private Protection" on Ships

Dockwise Heavy Lift Vessel

What do shipping companies do when facing legal restrictions on their ships that don't allow them the freedom to look out after their own interests? Why, they change the flag under which they sail to one with fewer restrictions.

That's exactly what is going on here with a threat from a Dutch shipping outfit as announced in a press release: Dockwise Requests more Leeway from Netherlands Government to Counteract Pirates:

Dockwise urges the Netherlands government to allow for better protection on its vessels to counteract piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. As the ability of governments to offer military protection is limited, the ability for ship owners to employ additional private protection is of the utmost importance. Despite several appeals, private protection onboard Dutch vessels could meet with legal impediments. Other nations do allow for such added protection measures. Dockwise eventually may be forced to have its vessels sail under a different flag if restrictions are not eased imminently.

On the growing piracy problem André Goedée, Dockwise's CEO, comments: "As an oil and gas service provider, our vessels - which as a consequence of their specific nature have been labeled by experts to be very vulnerable to pirate attacks - have to enter pirate-infested waters most months of the year. At this point we are not allowed to protect our employees adequately against pirates, while other nations do allow for added security measures. Our clients, too, request added security measures for their employees and cargoes on-board. In the interest of our employees and because of the increasing pressure from the industry itself, we may be forced to seek other alternatives - such as bringing the vessels under a different jurisdiction and flag - if regulations are not adapted quickly. We would regret having to take such a decision, but we are left with no choice should the Dutch government remain idle."

Dockwise is most noted for its fleet of "heavy lift" ships used to transport everything from oil rigs to damaged ships.

UPDATE: On a somewhat related note, Maersk Shipping announced last month an increased "risk surcharge" due to Somali pirates:

Reflecting higher costs stemming from a jump in piracy off the Somali coast, A.P. Moller-Maersk AS raised its emergency-risk surcharge. Maersk's container-freight division increased the fee on each 40-foot container shipped through risky waters to $200–$500 from $100–$400, to pass on some of the company's rising costs to customers, said Erik Rabjerg Nielsen, the division's head of daily operations. Customers typically pay about $3,000 total to ship a container from Asia to the U.S. He estimated that Maersk's antipiracy costs will rise to $200 million this year from $100 million last year as ships are forced to sail faster and longer to prevent hijackings and crews receive doubled salaries as compensation for the added work.

Piracy has an effect.

Anti-Pirate Proof of Concept? U.S. Navy Riverine Forces Take to the Sea

 Navy Times report "Riverine boats operate with amphib in test":

The prospect of meeting a sleek, armored riverine command boat and its fearsome array of .50-caliber machine guns at sea would undoubtedly induce second thoughts among pirates who prey on shipping in the Gulf of Aden.

That much is certain. But the boats have to get there first.

Tuesday, the Navy tested the ability to dock and secure the RCB and the smaller riverine patrol boat in the well deck of the anchored dock landing ship Oak Hill during a proof-of-concept test held at the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay.

Riverine force leaders gave the demonstration a thumbs-up. If senior Navy leaders agree, the riverine force could find itself with a new post-Iraq war mission set outside the green-water arena for which it is designed, and the Navy with yet another capability for the flexible and heavily deployed amphibious force.

With a few wrinkles removed, sounds like a good idea to try in the real world.

One of those wrinkles is that a lot more boats are needed to do the anti-piracy mission right.

And a really good strategy would be good, too.

U.S. Navy photos by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Michael R. Hinchcliffe

Somali Pirates: USS Bulkeley and Its Helicopter Protects Large Tanker, Pirates Unsuccessful in Dodging Bullets

Reported as USS BULKELEY PROTECTS MV ARTEMIS GLORY FROM PIRATE ATTACK:

USS Bulkeley (DDG-84)

At 1035 a.m. (local) May 16, MV Artemis Glory came under attack from pirates.

The German owned, Panama flagged very large crude carrier (VLCC) was on route from Juaymah Terminal in Saudi Arabia to China with a cargo of crude oil. The motor vessel came under attack whilst sailing south east through the Gulf of Oman.

Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) Diligence (A132) received a mayday call from the MV Artemis Glory, saying that their ship was under attack by pirates.

MV Artemis Glory

RFA Diligence relayed the mayday message to Combined Maritime Forces. UKMTO confirmed in a conversation with the Master of the MV Artemis Glory that she was being pursued by a skiff with four individuals on board who were firing small arms at the vessel.

USS Bulkeley, (DDG 84) operating with Combined Maritime Forces, responded to the mayday and launched her helicopter, an SH-60B from “Vipers” helicopter squadron, light (HSL) 48, detachment four to investigate the mayday call.

SH-60B (U.S. Navy photo)

The helicopter observed the MV Artemis Glory under attack by four individuals in a skiff, who were firing upon the Artemis Glory with small arms.

Under the principle of ‘extended unit self defence’ and in order to provide protection to the crew of the MV Artemis Glory, Bulkeley’s helicopter engaged the pirates. All of the pirates are believed to have been killed.

MV Artemis Glory has 23 crew persons onboard. No crew members were injured in the attack.

MV Artemis Glory photo by Ivan Meshkov from Shipspotting.com and used in accord with terms of that site.

Somali Pirates: Turks Capture Pirates, Free Dhow Crew

Good report from Saturn5 at Bosphorus Naval News:

The dhow turned out to be a Yemeni vessel, captured by the Somali pirates on 11 April 2011 to be used as a mother ship. The seven Yemeni fishermen on board were freed by the Turkish sailors.

Somali Pirates: Counter-Piracy the Aussie Way

HMAS Stuart

Reported as Australian ship bolsters patrol for pirates:

"We look for 'trip wires', or things that can suggest something untoward with the vessel," Lieutenant Commander Glynn said.

"These can include things like ladders, weapons, lots of people or skiffs. We'll check what's on board and then make sure we fly outside the 'threat band'."

One of the crew takes photos of the fishing boats, quickly flicking through the pictures as he crouches on the floor of the helicopter, searching for anything suspicious. If need be, the [HMAS ] Stuart will then change course to intercept the boat.

Read more: here.

Maritime Counter Piracy Conference

 Coming to the UAE in Dubai a Maritime Counter Piracy Conference (18-19 April 2011) titled: "Global Challenge, Regional Responses: Forging a Common Approach to Maritime Piracy."

Features a raft of anti-piracy papers including one ("Defensive vs. Offensive Technologies and Public/Private Operations in Maritime Piracy") by Claude Berube, who teaches at the U. S. Naval Academy, a couple by Martin N. Murphy ("Future Scenarios and Future Threats: What Happens if Piracy is not Controlled, and How Might Manifestations Change?" and "Countering Piracy: The Potential of Onshore Development" with Joseph Saba) and one by the U. S. Naval War College's James Kraska ("Looking for Law in all the Wrong Places: Maritime Piracy as a Domestic Legal Problem"). All of which will keep me reading for some time, since I am unable to attend this event in person, as much as I wish I could.

The guest list is full of smart people and I look forward to reading their thoughts on this troublesome international war against pirates.

Somali Pirates: If you take out the pirate "mother ships" you end up with less piracy? A NATO/EU Lesson Learned

From NATO Shipping Centre Daily Somali Piracy Overview:

Burning Pirate Boats - Anti-Piracy Technique of Proven Effectiveness

There were no new piracy attacks in the past 24 hours. The assessment of the number of dhow PAGs operating central Arabian Sea has been reduced from 3 to 2 following the disruption by POHJANMA today. This is a minimum figure and there remains the possibility that other dhows have got underway from Pirate anchorages and are now also in the area. No other recent activity of note. Low levels of pirate activity could continue in the GOA and the southern Somali Basin, particularly towards the coastal areas of the Kenyan/Tanzanian border.

About the FNS Pohjanma here.

Wow, a lesson learned.

I hope.