Iranian Subs Go to Sea = Yawn

Iranian Kilo-Class Sub

Much ado has been made about an announced sortie of Iranian ships (and wow!, maybe a submarine) in the Red Sea, see Iranian Navy Deploys Submarines in High Seas.

International waters is international waters, and the Iranians have as much right to be out there as anyone else with a boat collection.

I view this more as a publicity ploy that allows other naval forces to collect intelligence on Iranian submarines.

Here's the whole Fars News Agency report for your reading pleasure (I added some highlighting, but left off the snarking):

Informed sources said that the Iranian Navy has deployed its submarines in far seas as part of its plan for widening its naval presence in the high seas and oceans.

An informed source told FNA on Tuesday that the submarines were deployed in international waters together with the dispatch of 14th fleet of warships sent by Iran to the high seas.

The move comes after high-ranking Navy commanders announced preparedness to send submarines to long-term missions.

The source said that Iran's fleet of warships is now in the Red Sea as part of its naval mission.

"Identifying combat vessels of the different world countries, collecting information about sea beds in international waters are among the main tasks of these submarines," the source added.

The Iranian Navy dispatched its 14th flotilla of warships to the Gulf of Aden in May to protect the country's cargo ships and oil tankers against Somali pirates.

The 14th fleet of warships, comprised of IRI Bandar Abbas Warship and IRI Shahid Naqdi Destroyer, is tasked with patrolling and providing security for Iran's shipping lines.

In March, a senior Navy commander of the Iranian Army stressed the need for the Navy to boost its naval deployments outside the country's territorial waters as a strategic force.

"The Navy is in the middle of field and should be present all throughout the world seas," Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Navy Rear Admiral Gholam-Reza Khadem Biqam said at the time.

Also in March, Commander of Iran's Navy Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari announced that the Iranian Navy planned to expand its operational zone far beyond the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman in the next Iranian year (started on March 21).

In December, Sayyari said that the country was deploying submarines in the high seas to further boost its military power.

"To become the superior power in the region, we should turn into a regional power in military defense, and we should prove our might and capability not only inside, but also outside the region," he continued.

The Iranian Army Navy and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Navy have tight cooperation in controlling the country's waterways and protecting Iran's interests inside territorial waters and in the high seas.

Iran's naval power has even been acknowledged by foes. In a Sep. 11, 2008 report, the Washington Institute for the Near East Policy said that in the two decades since the Iraqi imposed war on Iran, the Islamic Republic has excelled in naval capabilities and is able to wage unique asymmetric warfare against larger naval forces.

According to the report, Iran's Navy has been transformed into a highly motivated, well-equipped, and well-financed force and is effectively in control of the world's oil lifeline, the Strait of Hormuz.

You might note that the Iranian "flotilla" and "fleet" consists of two surface ships. The IRIS Bandar Abas is a support and training ship and the other ship is a corvette, regardless of how Fars classifies it.

Exactly where the submarine (In my view, probably a single submarine, not "submarines" as indicated in the Fars piece) has deployed is not revealed except in "international waters." Maybe that's the Red Sea, maybe that's 30 miles off the Iranian coast.

Iranian Nahang Mini-Sub

Iran's submarine fleet is not large, as set out here:

Iran's submarine force currently consists of three Russian Kilo-class diesel-electric submarines (Tareq 901, Noor 902, Yunes 903), one 500-ton Nahang and four 120-ton Yono-class (also referred to as Qadir or Ghadir-class) midget submarines.

Iranian Ghadir Midget Sub

I doubt they sent any of the midget boats out, unless they were carried on some other ship. The Nahang is mini-sub, with external weapons, and unlikely to make a long transit. So, let's say they sent a Kilo somewhere. Good for them. Other navies do that all the time, without all the hoopla. Of course, this announcement is all about hoopla, isn't it?


This deployment reminds me of the old military adage that tracers "work both ways," in that  the announced mission of the Iranian sub's tasks is "Identifying combat vessels of the different world countries, collecting information about sea beds in international waters . . ." but going to sea also allows "the combat vessels of the different world countries" to do a little intelligence gathering on the Iranian submarine(s).

Got a ways to go on the "regional domination" thing. But, hey, they are out there. And maybe they are looking for places to lay mines. Or whatever.

See The Arkenstone's take on the deployment.

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.

Things About Pirates

First, from gCaptain, The Evolving US Piracy Policy:

The [U.S.] Dept. of State believes the best action plan is to deprive the pirates of ransom revenues, however it is very hard to track the money. The NSC [U.S. National Security Council] calls for disrupting bases in Somalia, but no action has been taken. Under UNCLOS, piracy is a crime of universal jurisdiction, yet prosecution is a matter of national “soft” laws. The multinational character of the Flags of Convenience (FOC) system complicates the situation where there’s no clear national responsibilities. Navies who capture pirates often can’t find States willing to prosecute. The area pirates operate are too vast for navies to enforce, and military assets are urgently needed elsewhere (particularly Afghanistan and Iraq). Pirates continue to attack less than one-half percent of shipping, and of those, have a 30% success rate. The Dept. of Defense argues that due to the relatively low number of incidents, merchant shipping needs to play a larger role in its own defense. It’s noted in all cases where private security teams are employed, they have success- fully kept pirates from boarding, making ships a hard target. Use of armed ships is contrary to BMPs, however, the ships that have 100% record of deterring pirate attacks are the ones that ignore the BMPs. Many Port states are against use of arms, which can create difficulties in ports of call.

Evolving policy? Sounds like the NSC has made this high visibility issue a low priority item. Which may make sense from the U.S. point of view since so few (okay, none) of the captured ships and merchant sailors are U.S. Of course, there is that "freedom of the seas" aspect that keeps some U.S. Navy ships out there bobbing about . . .

Shiptalk has a couple of post up about torture of Somali pirate captives "Human Costs" and "Holding Back". The first contains the not-so-surprising news that Somali pirates are not good hosts to their captives and are pretty rough in their piracy efforts:

The Oceans Beyond Piracy Project has gathered to fight this seeming lack of public concern/knowledge. Their study, “The Human Cost of Somali Piracy”, was launched on June 6 at Chatham House in London. The study’s findings indicate that during 2010:

• 4,185 seafarers were attacked with firearms and rocket propelled grenades.

• 342 seafarers were rescued from citadels (ships’ reinforced security rooms).

• 1,090 seafarers were taken hostage.

• 516 seafarers were used as human shields.

• As many as 488 seafarers were subjected to abuse or torture.

The cost of piracy is high for seafarers. Both successful and unsuccessful attacks expose seafarers to dangerous experiences with the potential for long-term physical and psychological trauma.

Somali pirates with hostages

The second Shiptalk post has to do with a security firm asserting that there is a "cover up" of sorts concerning the treatment of pirate hostages:

A security company speaking at a conference has claimed that shipowners are holding back some of the worst news about the treatment of seafarers taken hostage by Somali pirates.

Why a cover up? To not "alarm" seafarers heading into the pirate zone . . .

On another piracy front, the International Maritime Bureau has issued some warnings about piracy in the South China Sea (an area I've been neglecting lately), as set out here:

A global maritime watchdog warned ships traversing the South China Sea bordering Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore following the hijack of three tugboats and a barge in recent weeks.

Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau's, or IMB's piracy reporting center based in Kuala Lumpur, said alerts have been sent to ships in the area amid a sudden rash of hijackings.

"We are sending out this alert as these are the first three hijackings of vessels in the South China Sea this year," he said. "Normally pirates in the area are opportunistic as they rob a ship and flee but the hijacking of a vessel requires planning so we believe a syndicate is involved," Choong added.

A report on a missing tug (one of the above attacks) from the IMB's Live Piracy Report:

• Attack Number: 2011/232
• Date: Wed May 25 2011
• Vessel Type: Tug
• Location detail: Kuching to Port Klang
• Attack Type: Hijacked
• Incident Details:
  25.05.2011: NS : enroute from Kuching to port Klang, South China Sea.
  The tug towing a barge departed Kuching on 24.5.2011 with eta port Klang 30.05.2011.
  The tug and barge failed to arrive at the discharge port and the owners attempt to contact the tug was futile. On 02.6.2011 the barge was located by a Malaysian warship. The crew members were rescued by a fishing vessel. The tug is still missing.

About a year ago a hijacked tug was recovered in the Philippines undergoing an identity change, as set out here.

As usual, there are numerous reports in Southeast Asia, West Africa and South America of various anchored or moored vessels being boarded by robbers who either steal material from the vessels they board and/or rob the crew of their personal belongings.

UPDATE: In addition to the reports in Southeast Asia of moored or anchored vessels being boarded and robbed, in the last couple of weeks, there have been boardings and robberies of vessels underway in an area near Singapore, noted in ReCAAP reports:

(Report 12-11) On 30 May 11 at or about 0129 hrs, a Singapore-registered tanker Dong Jiang was underway at approximately 30 nm east of Horsburgh Lighthouse (01° 19.30' N, 104° 54.50' E) when six robbers boarded the vessel. The robbers stole cash and other valuables before they escaped. The vessel was enroute from Tanjung Pelapas, Malaysia to Balongan, Indonesia at the time of the incident. The crew was not injured.
***
(Report 13-11) On 2 Jun 11 at or about 0530 hrs, a Mongolia-registered general cargo ship Shipinco I
was underway at approximately 1.9 nm west of Batu Berhanti buoy (01° 10.76' N, 103° 50.87' E) when five robbers boarded the vessel. Armed with long knives, they robbed the Master, 3rd Officer and Chief Cook, and escaped with cash and the crew’s personal belongings including watches, mobile phones and clothing. The crew was not injured.
***
(Report 14-11) On 6 Jun 11 at or about 2315 hrs, an Indonesian-registered LPG tanker Asian Gas was
underway at approximately 3.65 nm southeast of Raffles Lighthouse (01° 9.06' N, 103° 48.0' E) when eight masked robbers from one speed boat boarded the vessel at the starboard quarter. Armed with long knives, they robbed the crew and escaped after taking with them laptops, mobile phones and undetermined amount of cash. The crew was not injured.

ReCAAP Report Map for Last 3  Incidents

Recommended Reading: Prime Movers of Globalization by Vaclav Smil

These days there are too few books that set out to inform you of some aspect of life that you may know nothing about in a few, well-chosen words. I recently finished* reading one such book from The MIT Press Prime Movers of Globalization: The History and Impact of Diesel Engines and Gas Turbines. A "prime mover" in an engineering sense is a primary source of power. But it is also the driving force of some sort of change - and makes the book's title very apt.

In essence, Professor Smil reflects on the changes wrought in global commerce by the development of reliable, low cost and efficient motive power for large ships and large aircraft.

This has, in his view, allowed the spread of international commerce and travel by lowering the costs per unit of travel and created the situation where assembly plants in the United States safely can rely on the "just in time" delivery of components from far distant lands at minimal cost for transportation. The huge diesel engines driving container ships that are as large as aircraft carriers has made it possible for goods to flow across the ocean and raised the economic well-being of both shipper country and consumer country. Grapes from Chile and clothing from Vietnam, fish products from Thailand all arrive at our Wal-Marts, Costco and local groceries without much thought of shipping expense. Crude oil from the Middle East travels cheap to Houston for refining. All due to the diesel engines that propel giant ships.

Wärtsilä RT-flex96C is a two-stroke turbocharged low-speed diesel engine designed by the Finnish manufacturer Wärtsilä. It is currently considered the largest reciprocating engine in the world, designed for large container ships, running on heavy fuel oil.

The General Electric GEnx (General Electric Next-generation) is an advanced dual rotor, axial flow, high-bypass turbofan jet engine in production by GE Aviation for the Boeing 787 and 747-8. The GEnx is intended to replace the CF6 in GE's product line.

The other night I overheard some parents discussing the difference between their own teen years and those of their kids. Once comment reflected that both domestic and international air travel was cheap and easy now - but when they were younger, a trip to the beach was a luxury. Almost no one could afford to fly just for fun. Professor Smil points to the efficiencies of the gas turbine engines that power the modern aircraft - which in turn allows larger aircraft to carry more people cheaply.

So, it may not be in your local library, but I highly recommend getting a copy of Prime Movers of Globalization: The History and Impact of Diesel Engines and Gas Turbines for an educational and thought-provoking read.

A good sample from Chapter 7:

A very large diesel powered oil tanker - moves crude oil very inexpensively

The expectations created by the rising globalization of trade and travel or both understandable and problematic. Affluent consumers (and richer urbanites in low-income countries) now take for granted that basic manufactured goods should be fairly inexpensive (and in terms of average purchasing power, actually progressively cheaper) and that they should have access to an unprecedented range of foodstuffs and products. The producers of these goods for distant markets (whether Chinese assemblers of toys and laptops or Chilean or South African growers of grapes and pears) have come to expect that their output will continue to be in demand in ever greater quantities. Leisure and business trips on an intercontinental scale have become routine for hundreds for hundreds of millions of travelers, resulting in previously unthinkable personal experiences and productive ventures, and airlines anticipate further large increases of their aggregate passenger and cargo capacities. The beneficiaries of the process expect its rewards to continue, but they do not appreciate how fragile this arrangement is and how impermanent it may turn out to be in the long run.

The fragility of the system he describes is not to the diesel or gas turbine engines - but rather, as we have seen in the last few years- to unexpected bumps in the underlying economic systems creating a cascading impact on demand and then supply. It is not the engines that get laid up as demand decreases but rather the hulls they operate in.

See also my earlier post on Things to Consider.


* "Recently finished" only because I had buried it other a bunch of far less relevant books.

Normandy Invasion, June 6, 1944

In case you were wondering what this day is famous for starting in 1944 try the Normandy Invasion, June 6, 1944:

On 6 June 1944 the Western Allies landed in northern France, opening the long-awaited "Second Front" against Adolf Hitler's Germany. Though they had been fighting in mainland Italy for some nine months, the Normandy invasion was in a strategically more important region, setting the stage to drive the Germans from France and ultimately destroy the National Socialist regime.

It had been four long years since France had been overrun and the British compelled to leave continental Europe, three since Hitler had attacked the Soviet Union and two and a half since the United States had formally entered the struggle. After an often seemingly hopeless fight, beginning in late 1942 the Germans had been stopped and forced into slow retreat in eastern Europe, defeated in North Africa and confronted in Italy. U.S. and British bombers had visited ruin on the enemy's industrial cities. Allied navies had contained the German submarine threat, making possible an immense buildup of ground, sea and air power in the British Isles.

A story you might not have heard, about how 22 old, mostly useless merchant ships were intentionally sunk to create breakwaters and the role of the " Naval Armed Guards" in that process from here:

Sunken "Block Ships"

The story of how a modern [artificial] port was built at Omaha and Utah beaches has already been revealed. Armed Guards on some 22 merchant ships which were scuttled [deliberately sunk] to make a breakwater played a vital part in this operation. For days they endured the early fury of the German counter-attack and helped give fire protection to the forces ashore from their partly submerged ships. This was a task which required courage and the ability to do without sleep.

Block Ships in Position with Gaps for Ship/Shore Traffic

The 22 block ships were carefully prepared for their assigned operation. The heavy [deck] gun aft was removed and four 20mm [anti-aircraft guns] and a 40mm [anti-aircraft gun] were generally substituted. The ships were stripped of all unnecessary gear. About eight explosive charges were placed in the holds and large openings were cut in the transverse bulkheads. Necessary food supplies and ammunition had to be moved topside, for the decks of some of the ships were to be under water at times.

The men aboard the 13 ships scuttled off Omaha Beach and the 9 ships scuttled off Utah Beach had much the same experiences. Crossing the [English] Channel there were the [enemy] mines and the E-boats [small fast German motor torpedo boats also known as Schnellboote or S-Boats; similar to American PT-boats]. By day German 88mm guns fired at the block ships, and by night enemy bombers came over.

Beachhead from Above with Block Ships in Position

The James Iredell was the lead ship among the block ships and she was scuttled at the appointed position on the afternoon of June 7, 1944. At 2030 German artillery fire became so heavy that the Armed Guards on this ship and on the Baialaide and the Galveston were evacuated. But they returned to their ships on the morning of June 8. The Armed Guards of the Baialaide remained at their guns until June 17. At high tide the main deck of the ship was six feet under water. The Armed Guards on the James Iredell and the Galveston recorded air attacks every night until June 15, when they were relieved. On the George W. Childs, which was scuttled on June 8, the Armed Guards had narrowly missed being hit by artillery fire as they lay off the beach on the night of June 7. Mines and E-boats had been encountered while crossing the Channel. There were three or four air attacks at night and one bomb landed 50 yards from the Childs. She was credited with two assists [in shooting down enemy aircraft]. She established a kind of open house for visiting firemen by furnishing food and quarters to countless numbers of troops and small boat crews. One of her Armed Guards was wounded by a shell fragment. Not until June 17 did the Armed Guards leave the ship.

The Courageous reported E-boat attacks en route to Omaha Beach, artillery fire upon arrival on June 7, and air attacks every night from June 7 to 12. On June 9 her Armed Guards hit a [German] plane which in turn dropped a bomb so close that the decks were sprayed with fragments. The plane crashed. The Potter was forced to seaward on the night of June 7 by [German] 88mm [artillery] fire, but was scuttled the next day. Many shell fragments landed on her decks and one Armed Guard was wounded. Her crew was relieved on June 13. Several bombs landed close to the James W. Marshall. Her Armed Guard officer remained on board until June 22 in connection with the command of all Armed Guards on the scuttled ships. But Army personnel took over the gunnery duties on the Marshall on June 13. The Wilscox had a narrow miss on June 11. Her Armed Guards were also evacuated on June 13. The Armed Guards on the Audacious remained aboard until June 18. The Armed Guards on the Olambala reported some 32 air attacks to June 16, but only one merchant seaman was wounded before the merchant crew was removed. Fragments from 88mm guns which were scoring near misses hit the decks of the Artemus Ward on June 7. One Armed Guard was wounded on June 9. Bombs narrowly missed on June 10 and 11, and shell fragments hit on the latter date. Part of the gun crew was removed on June 19. Because of a storm from June 19 to 22 [this was the great storm which wrecked the artificial "mulberry" harbors at the Normandy beachheads], the ship cracked. The last Armed Guards were not removed until June 22. The West Grama fired about 19 times and scored one assist on June 9. One Armed Guard on this vessel was wounded while at Omaha Beach. A bomb landed close to the ship on June 14. Her Armed Guards left the ship on June 18. She was credited with two assists [in shooting down German aircraft]. Flight Command reported 30 to 35 alerts prior to June 15.

At Utah Beach the George S. Wasson went through 32 raids from June 7 to 14. The David O. Saylor was forced to withdraw from Utah Beach because of heavy artillery fire which was straddling her on June 7. She was also forced to withdraw once on June 8 but was successfully scuttled in the afternoon. Her Armed Guards left on June 13. The West Nohno helped shoot down several enemy planes on June 10. Her Armed Guards left on June 18. The Benjamin Contee Armed Guards withdrew from the ship on June 14 after 32 raids. Artillery narrowly missed the Matt W. Ransom at Utah Beach. Her Armed Guards reported many alerts and indicated that from 8 to 10 rounds of [German] artillery fire were observed each day to June 15. They left two days later. The Vitruvius reported that six planes were shot down by her fire and by the shore batteries on June 10. She was narrowly missed by bombs on the night of June 11. The Armed Guards on the Victory Sword brought down six planes on the night of June 10. The West Cheswald claimed one plane destroyed. Her Armed Guards were not removed until June 19. The West Honaker was damaged by two skip bombs on June 8 and part of the merchant crew and the Armed Guards abandoned ship. Not until June 10 was she scuttled about 400 yards from the beach. Her Armed Guards left on June 14. The Armed Guard crews from the block ships were returned to the United States on the Queen Elizabeth. There was no loss of life among the Armed Guards taking part in this dangerous operation.

The Commander of United States Naval Forces in Europe highly commended the Armed Guard personnel for their participation in placing the block ships and defending the ships until relieved by Army personnel.

You want lessons in courage? D-Day at Normandy is just one example.


See "Ghost Ships of Normandy for more information on the "block ships." Block ships are an old military idea. Old merchant ships were not alone in being sunk as "block ships" - several old warships were also used. See here:

• HMS Centurion, old battleship sunk as a blockship in "Gooseberry" breakwater
• Courbet, Free Naval French Forces, old battleship sunk as a blockship in "Gooseberry" breakwater
• HMS Durban (light cruiser used as a blockship in "Gooseberry" breakwater)
• HNMLS Sumatra (Dutch, decommissioned due to crew shortages and losing her guns to HNMLS Flores and Soemba, used as blockship in"Gooseberry" breakwater)

The ships to be sunk were known as "corn cobs" and the breakwaters they created were known as "Gooseberries." Other components of the artificial harbors were "Mulberries." See here:

"Corn cobs" were block ships that crossed the channel either under their own steam or that were towed and then scuttled to create sheltered water at the five landing beaches.. Once in position the "Corn Cobs" created "Gooseberries". The ships used for each beach were:
Utah Beach (Gooseberry 1): Benjamin Contee, David O. Saylor, George S. Wasson, Matt W. Ransom,[7] West Cheswald, West Honaker, West Nohno, Willis A. Slater, Victory Sword and Vitruvius.

Omaha Beach (Gooseberry 2): Artemas Ward,[7] Audacious, Baialoide, HMS Centurion, Courageous, Flight-Command, Galveston, George W. Childs, James W. Marshall, James Iredell,[7] Olambala, Potter, West Grama and Wilscox.

Gold Beach (Gooseberry 3): Alynbank, Alghios Spyridon, Elswick Park, Flowergate, Giorgios P., Ingman, Innerton, Lynghaug, Modlin, Njegos, Parkhaven, Parklaan, Saltersgate, Sirehei, Vinlake and Winha.

Juno Beach (Gooseberry 4): Belgique, Bendoran, Empire Bunting, Empire Flamingo, Empire Moorhen, Empire Waterhen, Formigny, Manchester Spinner, Mariposa, Panos and Vera Radcliffe.

Sword Beach (Gooseberry 5): Becheville, Courbet, Dover Hill, HMS Durban, Empire Defiance, Empire Tamar, Empire Tana, Forbin and HNLMS Sumatra.

"Gooseberry"
The sheltered waters created by the Corn Cob block ships. Two of the "Gooseberries[8]" grew into "Mulberries", the artificial harbours.

You might gather that there was a great deal more involved in Normandy D-Day operations than sending landing craft ashore.

Take time to remember all those who took part in the French shore beginning of the liberation of Europe from the Nazis.

From Navy Art Gallery showing the Omaha beach just before the storm that wrecked much of the logistics structure - but also shows the Gooseberries in line offshore

Also from the Navy Art Gallery, Storm on "Gooseberry" by Dwight C. Shepler, Watercolor, June, 21 1944:

There, with decks awash in the roaring sea, the sunken block ships of the great harbor of "Mulberry" successfully rode out the storm. The part of the breakwater formed by the line of sunken ships was called "Gooseberry." Though they worked about on the bottom, the ships held their place throughout the unseasonal blow of June 19-22, 1944. At the height of the gale's fury, gunners stationed on a sunken merchantman sought safety on the fo'c'sle of the H.M.S. Centurion, an old British battlewagon which was the western bastion of Gooseberry.

Top photos from the Naval Historical Center. Photos of "block ships" from "Ghost Ships of Normandy, photo source unknown (but I am ready to learn and give proper credit).

UPDATE: Interesting read from the Navy Department Library:  Miracle Harbor:

AMERICAN and British officers planning the D-Day details in England were up against a tremendous problem. It was all very well to land troops on the beaches of Normandy, but once there they had to be kept supplied with immense quantities of ammunition, food, and weapons. How were these supplies to keep flowing without a harbor?

There was a limit to what landing craft could do. The rough Channel seas and the tide that rises and falls twenty feet meant that stuff put down on the flat Normandy beaches would be swamped by the tide before it could all be moved onto dry land. And the idea of starting off the invasion by capturing one of the heavily defended French ports was out of the question. It would take too long.

The story goes that one of the officers engaged in the planning remarked casually to one of his colleagues, not intending to be taken seriously, "Well, I suppose we'll have to take our harbors with us." This remark, it is reported, started the experts on a train of thought that ended at the point where the ramps of the prefabricated ports touched the Normandy shore.

Gasoline Pump Prices

What amkes up the price of a gallon of gas or diesel fuel at the pump? The federal Energy Infomatioon Agency has the info at Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update from whence cometh these graphics:

 

So, the biggest component is crude oil pricing. Which, in case you forgot, is driven by - supply and demand of crude oil.

Fearless Navy Bloggers Take to the Air: Midrats Episode 74 A Day Without Seapower 06/05 5pm Eastern on BlogTalk Radio

It's a radio!

Episode 74 A Day Without Seapower 06/05 by Midrats 5pm Eastern on Blog Talk Radio:

Almost a decade of involvement in two land wars in Asia combined with a series of costly and ill timed shipbuilding programs that have yet to produce ships anywhere near promised cost and performance has brought our Navy to the growing budget crisis in a delicate position.

The national security arena suffers from SeaBlindness about the critical requirements of seapower to the long term economic and security needs of a maritime, mercantile republic.

Battle of Midway, June 3-7, 1942

Sunday, June 5th at 5pm EST, using their work at The Heritage Foundation, Thinking About a Day Without Sea Power:Implications for U.S. Defense Policy as a starting point, join Sal from the blog "CDR Salamander" and me with our returning guests Mackenzie Eaglen and Bryan McGrath for the full hour to discuss the long view on the future direction of our Navy and Marine Corps team.

Part of the Invasion Fleet, D-Day Normandy, June 6, 1944

Join us here.

Illegitimi non carborundum

American spirit:



If Grand Rapids is dying today, look for its rebirth shortly after its death certificate has its ink dried.



Backgrounder.

Looks like someone forgot that "can do" spirit that is the bedrock of U.S. culture.

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

What to do about Somalia and its pirates?

U.S. Navy Admiral Robert Willard says Somalia needs governance to defeat piracy:

A top U.S. commander Wednesday said piracy in Somalia can only be defeated if the international community helps restore governance in the poor, lawless African country.

Adm. Robert Willard, chief of the Pacific Command, said navy patrols alone cannot stop the hijacking of ships if pirates' bases onshore are allowed to operate without interference. The international community is spending millions of dollars a day maintaining a flotilla of warships to protect key shipping lanes off East Africa.

"The organizers, the funders are the central problem ... but the international community has been unable to determine how to tackle the problem onshore," Willard told a regional forum in Malaysia.

"Clearly, one thing is to help Somalia recover from being the ungoverned state that it is," he said.

"Unless the international community goes to the root, and not the far end of the problem, it won't be solved."

Not so very much different are the thoughts of the top Chinese military commander, as reported here:

On a visit to the U.S. this week, China's top military commander Chen Bingde suggested that the international coalition patrolling the Gulf of Aden and the waters off the coast of Somalia ought to take decisive action against pirate dens on land. So far, the counter-piracy strategy has focused on the pirate "mother-ships," usually retrofitted trawlers that tow little skiffs out into the deep sea. Yet the pirate problem emanating from lawless Somalia cost the global economy over $8.3 billion in 2010. And China has a huge stake in securing its ever-increasing economic interests in the region.

Chen, the chief of the general staff of the People's Liberation Army, told reporters:

For counter-piracy campaigns to be effective, we should probably move beyond the ocean and crash their bases on the land... It is important that we target not only the operators, those on the small ships or crafts conducting the hijacking activities, but also the figureheads.

India, another potential major player in any activity that might be taken against the pirates, is backing off from its previously aggressive pursuit and arrests of Somali pirates, apparently responding to coercion by the pirates, as reported here:

The government has effected a policy shift in its anti-piracy operations, asking Navy not to arrest any more pirates, and also not to bring them to India's mainland. The government fears that its aggressive operations, especially the arrest of pirates and their incarceration in Mumbai, may have backfired. Somali pirates are retaliating against India's proactive stand by targeting Indian sailors, the security establishment believes. Presently, 43 Indian sailors are in the custody of pirates.

The situation is worrying for India, given the fact that over 10% of total seafarers working for shipping companies around the world are Indians. "We believe they are retaliating. Recently, while rest of their colleagues was released, seven Indians on a particular ship were taken to Somalia. We are still waiting to hear from them," a senior official said.

Another major shipping nation has not backed off in its treatment of Somali pirates it has captured. The Republic of Korea (South Korea) has sentenced a pirate leader to life imprisonment and other Somali pirates to multi- year sentences:

Aul Brallat, said to have fired at the commandos during an initial unsuccessful raid on January 18, was jailed for 15 years, while two other pirates were each sentenced to 13 years.

In the United States, several Somali pirates have received lengthy jail terms including life. It looks like, due to plea agreements, life sentences are pending for the Somali pirates involved in the capture of an American yacht that resulted in four U.S. citizen deaths, as reported here:

The guilty announcement are part of plea agreements that will allow them to avoid the death penalty, but face life in prison.

Spain has sentenced Somali pirates to lengthy jail terms as set out here:

A court in Spain has sentenced two Somali pirates to 439 years in prison each for their role in the 2009 hijacking of a Spanish fishing vessel.

A Dutch court has sentenced a pair of Somali pirates to 5 year prison terms.

Of course, there are Somali pirates imprisoned in the Seychelles, Kenya, Somalia, Yemen and other places.

However, since piracy is one of the few profitable ventures in Somalia, there is no shortage of new young men to venture to sea and to replace the imprisoned or dead.

The two military leaders have it right - the seat of piracy is on the land. But, as I have asked before, who wants to lead the way into Somalia?

UPDATE: South Africa and Mozambique have signed a Memorandum of Understanding covering anti-piracy activity (and Exclusive Economic Zone protection) it is reported here:

It emerged last month that the recently approved – but as yet unpublished – strategy includes plans to cover the country's entire exclusive economic zone (EEZ) with “some form of sensor, or combination of sensors that will produce the most optimal coverage”. Sisulu avered this in answer to a parliamentary question by Democratic Alliance MP SP Kopane. “It is obvious that such an integrated system will require the cooperation of many stakeholders and will benefit the RSA in order to ensure that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of our maritime zones remain intact,” Sisulu said. “Such an integrated system forms part of the deliberations on a maritime security strategy for the RSA.”

The minister added that the military had determined that a full spectrum of electronic and optical sensors, deployed from a variety of platforms would be “the optimal solution for managing the surveillance of our maritime zones.” She did not elaborate, other than noting the length of coastline “measures 3924 kilometres and the EEZ extends, for practical reasons, 370 kilometres to seaward of the baselines that approximate this coastline. The EEZ thus covers an area of approximately 1 537 000 square kilometres of open sea.

“Approximately 29% of the coastline is covered by fixed land-based radars (radar horizon depends on the height of the antenna) with a radar horizon of approximately 25 kilometres. It is thus clear that use must be made of a variety of platforms (ships, surveillance aircraft, helicopters) with a variety of sensors (eg radar, Automatic Identification System (AIS), Long Range Identification and Tracking (LRIT), electro-optical, optical and others) in order to monitor the EEZ of the RSA,” the minister explained.

UPDATE2: In re-reading the above update, I think it needs a little explanation- the import of the RSA and Mozambique agreement is that, in theory, puts up a sort of "southern limit line" on further expansion of the Somali pirates into the sea lines of communication in the area covered by the agreement.

Somali Pirates: Late May Activity

MV Orna

Somali pirates have been somewhat inactive due to sea conditions. See NATO summary here:

The current situation is generally quiet throughout the AOR as the weather is not conducive for pirate operations.

The MV ORNA is underway and last located in the vicinity of 12 17N 062 43E At 302136ZMAY11. She appears to be operating as a Mothership.

A Dhow PAG is probably active in Northern Arabian sea.

In South Red Sea and in the vicinity of Bab al Mandeb Strait a Dhow PAG is probably active based on several attacks in that area.

As set out in part of this NATO Shipping Centre SOMALIA PIRACY UPDATE 31st MAY 2011, much of the activity that has occurred has involved the movement of a suspected pirate mothership, the captured ship MV Orna:

MAY 31,2011
Latitude: 12 58N Longitude: 062 58E
Alert Number 191 / 2011
--- UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE ---
At 1316 UTC / 31 MAY / a previously hijacked ship MV ORNA was reported in position 12 58N 062 58E course 282 / 6.2 kts.
It is likely that this vessel is conduction mothership operations.
___________________________________________
MAY 31, 2011
LATITUDE 13 32N LONGITUDE 042 41E
Alert number 193 / 2011
--- UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE ---
At 0403 UTC / 31 MAY / a merchant vessel was reported under attack by 1 skiff in position 13 32 N 042 41 E.
6 POB in skiff, weapons and ladder reported.
***This vessel managed to evade hijack***
The Pirate action group is still in the area.
________________________________________________
MAY 29,2011
Latitude: 14 44N Longitude: 042 06E
Alert 192 / 2011
At 1157 UTC / 29 May a Merchant Vessel was attacked by two skiffs with six persons on board at position 14 44N 042 06E. Small arms have been fired.
*** vessel managed to evade hijack ***
_______________________________________
MAY 29,2011
Alert Number 191 / 2011
--- UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE ---
At 2252 UTC / 28 May / Hijacked vessel MV ORNA was reported in position 09 32N 058 07E. Course 076 / 8.2 kts
It is likely the ship is being used as a pirate mothership
______________________________________
MAY 28, 2011
Alert Number 191 / 2011
---UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE---
At 0150UTC / 28 MAY / a previously hijacked ship MV ORNA was reported in position 07 57N 055 16E Course 068 / 7.5 kts
It is likely that this ship is being used as a pirate mother ship.
________________________________________
MAY 27, 2011
Latitude 07 09N Latitude 053 20E
Alert Number 191 / 2011
---UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE---
At 0830 UTC / 27 MAY / a previously hijacked ship was reported in position 07 09N 053 20E Coure 078 / 7.5 kts
It is likely that this ship is being used as a pirate mother ship.
________________________________________
MAY 26, 2011
Latitude 06 09N, Longitude 050 33E
Alert Number 191 / 2011
---ALERT ALERT ALERT---
At 0908 UTC / 26 MAY / a previously hijacked ship MV ORNA was reported in position 06 09N 050 33E Course 072 / 7kts
It is likely now that ship is being used as a pirate mother vessel.

The "Orna Track":

Track of MV Orna (click to enlarge)

Memorial Day

Today we honor and remember those who died in the the service of their country.

Remembered at places like this:

Take a moment and thank them.

This Week in a Cartoon

Thank you, Scott Adams.

Western "Weather Machines" "Stealing" Iranian Rain- Says Wacky Ahmadinejad

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Europe "stealing Iran's rain":

"Western countries have designed plans to cause drought in certain areas of the world, including Iran," Mr Ahmadinejad said in the city of Arak in Markazi province.

"Stolen Rain"

"According to reports on climate, whose accuracy has been verified, European countries are using special equipment to force clouds to dump" their water on their continent, he said.

By doing so, "they prevent rain clouds from reaching regional countries, including Iran," Mr Ahmadinejad charged.

Next, Mr. Ahmadinejad, we'll be exporting tornadoes to plague you personally. We have plenty to share.

 For another example of crazy theories of weather modification see here.

Fearless Navy Bloggers Take to the Air: Episode 72 Lawfare and the Long War 05/22 on Midrats

Modern warfare and counter-terrorism bump up against international law and the "law of war" on a moment to moment basis - and that's the subject of this week's Midrats show - Episode 72 Lawfare the Long War 05/22 by Midrats on Blog Talk Radio:

Never in our history have we fought a war where law, lawyers, and layers of legalese have impacted all levels of the war, Political, Strategic, Operational, and Tactical.

Why do we find ourselves here and in what direction are we going?

From Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and even domestically, the legal definition of the use of military power is evolving.

To discuss the impact of Lawfare for the full hour with Sal from the blog "CDR Salamander" and EagleOne from "EagleSpeak" will be David Glazier, CDR USN (Ret.).

David is a Professor of Law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. Prior to Loyola, he was a lecturer at the University of Virginia School of Law and a research fellow at the Center for National Security Law, where he conducted research on national security, military justice and the law of war. He also served as a pro bono consultant to Human Rights First.

Before attending law school, Glazier served twenty-one years as a US Navy surface warfare officer. In that capacity, he commanded the USS George Philip (FFG-12), served as the Seventh Fleet staff officer responsible for the US Navy-Japan relationship, the Pacific Fleet officer responsible for the US Navy-PRC relationship, and participated in UN sanctions enforcement against Yugoslavia and Haiti.

Glazier has a JD from the University of Virginia School of Law, an MA from Georgetown University in government/national security studies, and holds a BA in history from Amherst College.

So, with experience ranging from warrior to law of war scholar, Professor Glazier has some interesting (and sometimes unexpected) views on the matters described above.

Join us this Sunday at 5pm Eastern as we delve into the world of "lawfare." I promise that the name of Hugo Grotius will be invoked somewhere along the way.

Somali Pirates: Armed Guards on Maersk Alabama Scare Away Pirates

Reported here:

The Maersk Alabama, escaped another pirate attack last weekend in the Gulf of Aden.

The famous victim of a 2009 attack, in which its captain was held hostage for three days on a lifeboat until U.S. Navy snipers killed the kidnappers, escaped the recent attack with the help of an armed security team, according to a Danish media report and two industry sources with deep ties to various sectors of the maritime industry.

Five pirates in a speedboat rapidly approached the small container vessel on Saturday night and fled when private security guards onboard the vessel fired warning shots in the air, the Danish newspaper Borsen reported on its Web site.

The vessel is owned and operated by Maersk Line Ltd., the U.S. subsidiary of Denmark’s Maersk Line, the world’s largest container shipping company.

The attack occurred in the international transit corridor patrolled by international naval forces in the Gulf of Aden, according to the sources, who asked not to be named because of the sensitive nature of their business relationships with Maersk. The vessel was on its way from Salaleh, Oman, to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Both sources stressed the Maersk Alabama never was in any danger and was never fired upon.

Such probes, to test the ability of merchant ships to defend themselves or take evasive action, are relatively common in the Gulf of Aden, but the Maersk Alabama attracts more attention when it encounters pirates because of its history.

The use of shipboard armed security teams is deterring some pirate attacks.

Take a look at these reports involving the Indian Ocean area from 6 May to 16 May 2011, (from the Anti-Shipping Activity Messages found here):

Date of Occurrence: 05/16/2011 Reference Number: 2011-247
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 24° 11' 00" N 61° 11' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: MERCHANT VESSEL
Description: AROUND 81 MILES SOUTHEAST OF CHAHBAHAR, IRAN: A merchant vessel reported coming under attack at 1036Z on 16 May in position 24-11N 061-11E in the Gulf of Aden. Vessels are advised to keep 100 miles clear of this position and to exercise extreme caution.

Date of Occurrence: 05/15/2011 Reference Number: 2011-246
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 14° 09' 00" N 55° 25' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: MERCHANT VESSEL
Description: AROUND 171 MILES NORTHEAST OF SOCOTRA ISLAND, YEMEN: A merchant vessel reported coming under fire at 1639Z on 15 May in position 14-09N 055-25E. Vessels are advised to keep 100 miles clear of this position and to exercise extreme caution.

Date of Occurrence: 05/14/2011 Reference Number: 2011-244
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 13° 54' 42" N 57° 56' 12" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: CARGO SHIP
Description: AROUND 220 MILES OFF SOCOTRA ISLAND, YEMEN: A general cargo ship underway spotted a mother vessel launch a skiff which approached the ship at 25 knots. Duty officer raised alarm, increased speed, altered course SSAS activated, security team onboard alerted and crew went to the citadel. The security team fired rocket flares when the skiff was at a distance of 1.5 miles but the skiff continued to approach the ship. When the skiff closed to 600 meters, the security team fired warnig shots the skiff continued its approach and the next warning shots were fired when the skiffs were at a distance of 400 meters from the vessel. This resulted in the pirates aborting the attempted attack and moving towards their mother vessel.

Date of Occurrence: 05/14/2011 Reference Number: 2011-242
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 19° 13' 00" N
60° 19' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: CHEMICAL TANKER
Description: AROUND 190 MILES OFF RAS AL HAD, OMAN: Pirates in a dhow and a skiff chased a chemical tanker underway. Master raised alarm, icreased speed and took evasive maneuvers resulting in the pirates aborting the attempted attack. There were 4-5 pirates in the skiff with ladders sighted.

Date of Occurrence: 05/14/2011 Reference Number: 2011-243
Geographical Subregion: 63 Geographical Location: 8° 32' 00" N
67° 53' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: TANKER
Description: AROUND 304 MILES WEST OF MINICOY ISLAND, INDIA: About five pirates in a skiff chased and fired upon a LPG tanker underway. Ship raised alarm, increased speed and took evasvie maneuvers resulting in the pirates aborting the attempted attack.

Date of Occurrence: 05/13/2011 Reference Number: 2011-245
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 13° 10' 42" N
48° 37' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: CONTAINER SHIP
Description: GULF OF ADEN: A small fast contact was noticed on radar approaching a container ship underway at 4 miles. Duty officer monitored the contact and at a distance of 1.6 miles it was observed as a skiff and alarm was raised. When the skiff approached at a distance of 50 meters the bridge team noticed 4-5 pirates onboard with a hook ladder. The onboard security team fired two shots in to the skiff when the skiff closed to 30 meters resulting in the pirates aborting the attempted attack.

Date of Occurrence: 05/11/2011 Reference Number: 2011-236
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 18° 42' 00" N
59° 32' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: PRODUCT TANKER
Description: AROUND 220 MILES SOUTH OF RAS AL HAD, OMAN: Pirates in a skiff armed with rpg and guns chased and fired upon a product tanker underway. Master raised alarm, took evasive maneuvers and instructed crew to proceed into citadel. Armed security team took measures to deter boarding of pirates resulting in the pirates aborting the attck. Crew and ship are safe.

Date of Occurrence: 05/10/2011 Reference Number: 2011-237
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 25° 17' 48" N
58° 06' 48" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: CONTAINER SHIP
Description: GULF OF OMAN: Two skiffs approached a container ship. The vessel altered course, increased speed raised alarm, crew went to citadel. There were four pirates in each boat. Long rods attached with hooks and ladders were noticed on the skiffs. The skiffs followed the vessel at a distance of 1-3 cables astern. Later the skiffs aborted the attempt and moved away.

Date of Occurrence: 05/10/2011 Reference Number: 2011-239
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 17° 34' 00" N 58° 00' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: BULK CARRIER
Description: AROUND 235 MILES EAST OF SALALAH, OMAN: Pirates in two skiffs armed with rpgs and guns chased and fired upon a bulk carrier underway. Master raised alarm, SSAS activated increased speed, took evasive maneuvers and contacted warships for assistance. Due to the aggresive maneuvers, the pirates aborted the attempted attack. The ship and crew members are safe.

Date of Occurrence: 05/08/2011 Reference Number: 2011-232
Geographical Subregion: 63 Geographical Location: 12° 09' 00" N 59° 20' 18" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: BULK CARRIER
Description: AROUND 280 MILES EAST OF SOCOTRA ISLAND, YEMEN: Two skiffs with firve pirates in each armed with rpg and automatic weapons chased and fired upon a bulk carrier underway. Ship sent distress message, raised alarm, increased speed and made evasive maneuvers. Bulk carrier also deployed the security team onboard and contacted authorities for help. A military aircraft was deployed. Onboard armed security team fired warning shots resulting in the pirates aborting the attack.

***

Date of Occurrence: 05/06/2011 Reference Number: 2011-234
Geographical Subregion: 62 Geographical Location: 16° 14' 00" N 55° 47' 00" E
Aggressor: PIRATES Victim: PRODUCT TANKER
Description: SALALAH, OMAN: Armed pirates in a skiff chased and fired upon a product tanker underway. The tanker took evasive maneuvers and contacted the coalition naval forces. The naval vessels in the area responded to the distress call and the pirates aborted the attack. Vessel and crew are safe.

Ten days, 4 thwarted attacks due to armed security teams.

India: Growing a Navy - Adding 101 Ships Over Next 20 Years

Reported at Worldmaritime News - India Expects to Invest Nearly USD 50 Billion for 101 New Warships:

India is expected to invest nearly $50 billion to strengthen its naval forces over the next 20 years, adding 101 new warships, ranging from destroyers to nuclear submarines, the Indian Express reported.

“Going by the investment value, India is expected to build sophisticated destroyers, new generation and new radar vessels, nuclear submarines, and amphibious ships,” the paper quoted US naval analyst Bob Nugent as saying.

Nugent said China would likely spend $24 billion to build 113 war vessels, focusing on aircraft carriers, over the same period.

INS Mysore (D60)

Let me recommend Robert Kaplan's book, Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future of American Power to you. Here's a quote from a interview with Mr. Kaplan by Tom Ricks:

The surprise of this book is that future wars and conflicts may be vastly different than the ones of the moment. Instead of fighting neighborhood by neighborhood in Baghdad or Kandahar, we may in the future have to influence vast spaces on the map through naval maneuvers.

All of which makes the point that India sits on some major sea lines of communication on which flows a substantial amount of the world's energy and commercial shipping.

As a rapidly developing nation, India has a vital interest in protecting its sea lanes and is apparently making a serious commitment to protecting them.

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.