Just watched “Captain Phillips” for the first time. Is it actually common for cargo ships, especially in that area, to actually have no weapons or security personnel? I’m not sure if it actually happened like that irl, but it seems like the whole thing could have been prevented by just 2-3 guys with AR’s
It's a big fricking hassle to deal with legally transporting firearms internationally, so yes, it's quite common for vessels to have no firearms on board.
The ones that employ PMCs sometimes just toss rifles overboard before coming to port, it sounds like a waste but it's better than having your ass reamed out for 'arms trafficking' by the authorities of whatever country you docked in.
That's moronic, you can't traffic anything that stays on the ship.
Take some drugs somewhere and see if that argument holds water.
>1 gun = freight trailer of aks to an african warlord
Countries territories are generally recognized to include the water within 12 miles of their land, so even if you never took the gun off the boat you'd still technically be illegally importing firearms into another countries territory. That person wasn't larping, and throwing a dozen 1,500$ AR's off the side of the bow 13 miles from port is a lot cheaper than lawyers or having a ship and its cargo stolen.
Please learn what LARP means if you insist on using it.
It means live action role-play, and it was used in a sarcastic manner intended to infer the person I replied to was responding to was telling the truth. If you absolutely have to take a ship in dangerous waters without an escort you hire PMC's and they chuck the guns overboard before they're too close. Of course, sometimes they just claim to have had a boating accident and they're still onboard, but that's risky bidness and not common practice. As another anon mentioned it's way cheaper and easier to just sail further from the coast because most of these pirates are using basic small fishing boats and the like to approach and would probably die on the way to you if they could even see you to begin with.
>it was used in a sarcastic manner
No it wasn't.
Please learn what 'infer' means.
Why can't the armed securities and their equipment just stay on a smaller boat outside of the 12 miles while the ship unloads it's cargo at the port?
Shipping is a commodity business. Small hits to the bottom line mean a lot.
fuel costs money, throwing the guns away is cheaper.
Because delays of minutes cost tens of thousands, hours millions, days billions. It's just cheaper to throw the shit overboard while keeping to the timetable and cargo ships take a long time to get up to speed and slow down as well as maneuver. Most shipping companies just stay far enough out it'd take low-tier mil or pmc tier equipment to reach them and not die in the process and for that amount of money a somali pirate or really any modern pirate could live like a king until the day they died of old age at 34.
Then countries should make those technicalities more amenable to international transport or have international transport pass them by. Shipping companies shouldn't be putting up with this shit.
There are ways around that. PMC that guard ships in pirate dangerous water (Somali yeah) started to utulise floating bases. They board ship who enters danger zone, after passage they leave to their base boat taking guns with them. So guns stay in international waters.
False.
Most of the ships usually have at least one or two stashed rifles. It is not the only "illegal" thing that is usually carried either.
This. It all comes down to the captain/owner and how experiend the crew is.
They do. Don't listen to others telling you otherwise. Like other anon said, it depends. But to claim that "most", "majority" or even "all" is nonsense.
t. nearly got piracy charges
you have no idea what you are talking about
Prior to the Maersk Alabama hijacking, yes. Many companies just didn't want to bother with armed private security on board their ships for the reasons described by
After the Maersk Alabama hijacking, many shipping and passenger/cruise ship companies started to employ private security. There are two common methods used by private security companies working on ships to avoid breaking the law. The first is to throw the weapons overboard before entering port (as described by the other anon). The other method is to meet the security detail in international waters, have them board the ship and remain on it for the duration of the voyage, and for them to also leave the ship on their own vessel once the client ship reaches its destination.
Here is a video of some guards getting into a shootout with pirates on the open ocean:
Longer version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIMjQOCLkS4
No.
You don't throw your guns to water.
You simply hide them well and get ready those shut-up funds for any potential LEOs. Solid chunk of any bigger ship does this, one would argue most of them have at least one long gun on board.
I would do this for minimum wage. How can I sign up?
Just google it.
You'd probably need previous military experience with combat experience though, ideally SF.
Maybe you could get away with armed security experience and actual shoot outs.
The one thing they don't want is guys who have no combat experience up against pirates who are used to shooting people and being shot at.
It depends on the owner, and that ship was owned by some Germs who thought guns are scawy.
>Is it actually common for cargo ships, especially in that area, to actually have no weapons or security personnel?
It was. Probably still is.
>it seems like the whole thing could have been prevented by just 2-3 guys with AR’s
Until the pirates step up their game.
>Until the pirates step up their game.
Then you step up your game and upgrade to drum mags and lightning links. That's implying they would ever reach the level to warrant the jump to SAWs.
Bear in mind they’re also super vulnerable on those tiny boats that aren’t very stable and you get a height advantage on those freight ships which helps a lot too.
Like frick, even one guy with a cutlass at the top of their boarding ladder would have been better than nothing
Pretty common. Most ships don't take the precaution of hiring security as it costs a fortune. They take other measures like barb wiring and reinforcing the shit out of the bridge, fixing fire hoses outwards to swamp pirate skiffs or brain them as they swing about, put cardboard over portholes to reduce emitted light and make them harder to spot and by taking the simple expedient of sailing further out to sea where pirates can't so easily take and seize ships without multinational patrols interceding. Cpt Phillips got into that mess because he chose to ignore advice and sail close to shore.
t. knower
So would it not be feasible to just carry a couple-few small arms on board for emergencies? I assume it would be an issue like
>So would it not be feasible to just carry a couple-few small arms on board for emergencies?
No because your average merchant crew of today is a bunch of shit-scared Bangladeshis and Filipinos so they're most likely to hurt themselves. Best thing you can provide them is a Pirate Precautions PowerPoint telling them to get in the bridge tower, chain and bar every entrance, lock the helm to steam in a circle and squeal into the radio for help.
Occasionally however they do kick ass. Somali pirates are massive pussies, I recall a recent-ish documentary about a Dutch ship on pirate patrol receiving a distress call from a Pakistani merchant under attack. The Dutch ship had a mechanical so could only do half speed so it took them a while to steam close enough to dispatch the heli to render assistance. By the time they arrived on station they actually had to rescue the pirates from the Pakis who had rammed and sunk their fast boats and were steaming in circles and throwing shit at them as they trod water helplessly.
You can thank the Eurocucks for that
>NO YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE WEAPONS ON BOARD!!!
>WHAT IF YOU HURT THE BROWN OR ASIAN PIRATES????
>WHY ARE YOU BRINGING WEAPONS INTO OUR PORT????? YOU THINK YOU"LL BE ATTACKED BY PIRATES? FRICKING RACISTS!!!
Christ you're stupid
Hypothetically what's stopping someone from "accidentally coming across" a bunch of ARs and just keeping them under a bed or something? Would there be any consequences if you were to shoot at pirates? What if you "accidentally came across" something stupid like a functioning RPG-7 or M2 Browning?
This is going to sound moronic but I was under the impression having drugs in international waters is not a crime, but the getting them out of one country or into another part is.
>international waters
Does not mean what most people think it means. You're from X, you fly X's flag, you're under X's jurisdiction. Do something stupid enough and let people find out about it and practically anyone with the capability to find you and kick your ass can and will do so.
they have off shore armory ships that redeliver new rifles to replace the ones they chucked off the boat.
they even take pics of them tossing shit into the ocean. the cost of guns is a few thousand. any delay in port or legal issue or hell fuel needed to change course is tens or hundreds of thousands in lost profit.
Shipping companies strictly forbid the crew from being armed. Ships usually put nets/other items up to block the areas where the deck is closest to the waterline. Captain Phillips is an butthole for cutting his route short in an attempt to save the company money on fuel.
This inccident precipitated more security contractors being used. The issue is you now have 2-4 guys that aren't really doing anything 99% of the time on your payroll. Most of these ships have pretty small crews of a two dozen people or so that's a substantial increase in overhead. Additionally the moronic security guards can get into trouble themselves. A few years ago a couple of them OD'ed on heroin the bought in port.
>The issue is you now have 2-4 guys that aren't really doing anything 99% of the time on your payroll.
This right here is a really good point. It's why cops are associated with donuts, security is expensive but if you give cops free donuts & coffee at your shops then you have cops showing up at all hours of the day for just a few bucks.
>Most of these ships have pretty small crews of a two dozen people or so that's a substantial increase in overhead
also, hazard pay for these jobs is bretty gud
a contact I have in another forum is a former SF guy who makes fricktons on antipiracy
Usually hiring four monkeys is substantially cheaper than the increased insurance cost when sailing high risk routes without them.
I once saw some FBI spooks literally shoveling P90s into the ocean. It breaks my heart just thinking about it.
historically the main role of the Navy is to hunt down pirates, and it's still one of their biggest job.
Outside of some specific area (like Somalia), you don't need a security crew.
Why don't they just carry weapons and PMCs anyways and if any asshurt African nation tries to stop them they can just have their PMC companies sink whatever shit navies they have? I say just keep sinking African countries naval ships with private PMC's every time they try to protect piracy (since they usually work in tandem and turn a blind eye to them) and tell the UN to frick off if they start crying about it.
it's not the African countries that throw hissy fits, they couldn't care less. It's the Europeans who throw hissy fits about weapons coming into their maritime territory when the ships reach their destination
Ever sail into Japan?
never aboard a vessel that wasn't under SOFA status, but Japan is the exception that proves the rule. They essentially copied all of Europe's governance with the Meiji Revolution and then had that reinforced after WWII
Yes white people are naive and stupid. Hurr let's just go out on the open seas and sail near Africa with nothing to protect us.
Some companies DO hire private security for their ships, but it's expensive, doesn't always stop the ship from being hijacked, and theres only like fifty pirate attacks a year with picrel many ships at sea at any given point so some companies forego it in favor of rigging shit to deter attackers, sailing further off shore, reinforcing the bridge so that the crew can just hide in there and call for help, and playing the numbers game.
This seems like a really typical job ad. I saw about five different ads with pretty similar requirements to this:
https://www.smartrecruiters.com/USPAInternational/743999700968138-armed-ship-security-officer-anti-piracy-somalia-
>25k/month
Not bad. Would have expected less with the influx of third worlders.
I was surprised how low it was, I make that much sitting on my ass at home doing software dev.
They have to be away 30 days at a time.
Cruising the seas has a certain charm but I bet it gets old after a week.
>They have to be away 30 days at a time.
They can pretty much do your software dev while being there. That is the beauty of security gigs, you often have shitload of free time on your hands.
>doing software dev.
that's brainy work, mate
this is glorified security work, for upjumped grunts
they're just sitting around waiting to be shot at
This happened in 2009, after this armed guards and merchant marine security became much more common. Before that, they had LRADs and water hoses as non lethal deterrents, this clearly didn't work (in the movie they find a spot where the hose isn't pointing down the side and get up there).
So, back in 2009 yes, very common. But now, no its pretty common to have armed security on board. Most of the people in the thread are talking out of their ass.
Let me give you some "inside baseball" here. I've sailed merchant over 30 years and have sailed for Maersk. I didn't sail with Phillips, but with guys who did.
I did sail with some of the others in the crew of the Alabama.
1) the captain of almost all US flag ships has a .38 revolver, but it's understood that it's meant to be used against his crew during a mutiny.
2) shipping companies are cheap fricks, and are TERRIFIED of being sued or fined. The days of the drunken sailor are largely long past in the US fleet, but old biases die hard, so giving crew guns is not something the company is gonna just do.There's also training and maintenance of the weapons to be done.
It's cheaper for companies to do "security theater" like fake and Gay gates,(rewatch the beginning when Phillips signs on at Salalah...see how well the little gate worked later?), and the firehouse bit.
3) these pirates were idiots. The Somali piracy industry was part of a network. Somalis infest East Africa and Arabia and like refugees everywhere, do the shit work.
Other anon was correct in that most box ships and tankers are crewed by Filipinos and are horribly exploited. Some of those boys haven't been paid for months, and no, they can't just quit because the captain had their passport. Many of hie officers are Croatian or Russian and aren't treated that much better.
4) the Somali shit workers in the ports get to know the Filipino shit workers on the ships, and feel out the crew. If the ships heading that way, they will strike a deal with the crew to take the ship and the crew gets to kick back and drink beer and fish for a few weeks or months in Somalia while the company's underwriters get the bite to buy the ship and the cargo back...and pay the fricking crew.
This is a pretty sweet deal for the crew, since the get to load around rather than be worked to death and they get paid for what they're owed.
5) the pirates that hit Alabama weren't wired into any network. They were freelancing, and simply chose the wrong ship.
6) Phillips was an idiot. There was no need for him to stay on the Bridge. The engine gang had shut down the engine, turned off the lights, and didn't silence any of the alarms. good luck getting a ship started and moving and steering with 4 guys if you don't know the plant.
Even if you could, the little wheel on the Bridge doesn't do shit if someone in the Steering Gear is trick-switching,(emergency steering), from back aft. Ships are not planes.
7) nobody thought to make or employ improvised weapons. A glass jar of used paint thinner an a burning rag dropped on the pirates while they dealt with that homosexual gate would have set them on fire, and all of a sudden, jumping OFF the ship and INTO the sea would have become their highest priority. You already had the fire pump running, and one thing companies DO train mariners to do is fight fires...so why the frick not?
But it makes for a short movie...
8) Those waters do have an International anti-piracy naval squadron, which is pretty ridiculous...destroyers and frigates hunting fishing boats, for frick's sake. Of course ALL boats are "fishing boats"...until they're not. And that's not gonna happen while that Dutch or Spanish Navy frigate is anywhere nearby.
9) some companies now have PMCs that do as others have described. It's another scam, too, and those guys aren't paid all that much...which means the pirates will get tipped off to which ships DON'T have PMCs aboard...cell phones are interesting like that. This makes the employment of PMCs an open-ended obligation for the companies, but the ships weren't built with spare rooms and toilets and showers for an extra six-seven guys, nor were stores taken on to feed them. Yemen or Oman to Kenya is about a week long run at 12-14 knots,(Africa is a LOT bigger than a flat map shows, and Greenland is not as big as it appears either).
I have some (mostly indirect admittedly) knowledge about maritime shipping and this is my knowledge on the subject:
1) As several anons noted earlier in the thread, guns are a legal nightmare for shipping, so many companies don't use them. as far as I understand it, most ships have a rifle or two hidden away in some cupboard for emergency use, even if they won't legally admit they do. in the case of piracy, guns are generally not needed for defense because you can usually ward them of with hoses and the like.
2) Cargo ships are actually very bad targets for pirates, as they're just poor Africans who need money and they have no use for the 1500 containers of made in China plastic shit cargo ships usually carry. they prefer to go after big yachts and the like, as they are more likely to have cash.
3) in the unlikely event that a cargo ship is boarded by pirates, they are usually after a ransom of both the crew and the ship, and they know damn well that killing their captives will cause A) shipping in their area to decrease, hurting their profits and B) the international community to take notice and decide to solve the pirate problem by force.
4) Crews usually surrender due to point 3, and giving them guns makes about as much sense as giving the wagie behind the register at you local McD's a gun so he can stop potential robberies. Cargo ships are insured against piracy, and the insurance company might actually demand the crew surrender when captured, as any resistance can put both their lives, and the integrity of the ship at risk.
>most ships have a rifle or two hidden away in some cupboard for emergency use
I don't know who told you this, but most cargo ships don't have any weapons on board. Those that visit ports in USA, Canada, China or Australia shouldn't even joke about having weapons on board, because ship inspections by state authorities are a regular thing and taken very seriously.
that specific one came from my cousin, and he mostly did euro-asian transport, so it's probably more common there then, might also have just been a thing with the company he shipped with.
if he works for some smaller company it's possible, those are known to bend the law a bit
It's very common in Africa and parts of Asia to have armed security. If they can keep the weapons and kit on board at port they will, but usually a smaller vessel will take all of it and stay at sea until the ship is back in international water.