Author Topic: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.  (Read 2460 times)

Offline ColSuave

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 148
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #60 on: November 17, 2008, 02:00:32 PM »
There's always the expensive solution to 'persuade' them to go away. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg
Quote
the best cure for "wife ack" is to deploy chaff:    $...$$....$....$$$.....$ .....$$$.....$ ....$$

Offline ColSuave

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 148
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #61 on: November 17, 2008, 02:02:34 PM »
There's always a solution to 'persuade' them to go away. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg
maybe some escorts for ships passing through their waters. Though i have to admit the high pressure boiling water sounds like an amazing idea.
Quote
the best cure for "wife ack" is to deploy chaff:    $...$$....$....$$$.....$ .....$$$.....$ ....$$

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #62 on: November 17, 2008, 02:41:20 PM »
Didn't they use high pressure steam/hot water "guns" in the movie The Sand Pebbles?

63tb

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #63 on: November 17, 2008, 03:07:26 PM »
There's always the expensive solution to 'persuade' them to go away. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg

You'd be more likely to hit the protected ship than the dinghys with that  :D

PT boat sort of small attack ships equipped with big fuel tanks and armed with small caliber automatic cannons and an armed crew could probably do more. It would require couple of "PT" boat tenders and a bunch of the "PT" boats, but that's less of a problem than trying to find and operate 10 frigates in the area.

Bogues with choppers instead could be handy too, but there isn't any and the next available choice is too few and expensive. Choppers too would be expensive to operate. Though bogues with those brazillian turboprop fighters could be neat (yeah yeah, I know, they're not designed to operate from a carrier. make it happen!). Far less expensive to operate than choppers and travel faster. Although it may be better to design a whole new plane which is purpose built to fight pirate vessels. It wouldn't need much and it'd be cheaper. A single engine cessna with more powerful engine, strenghtened landing gear, a hook, some armour against small arms, guns and capability to operate at night (not just fly, but combat the pirate vessels) would do.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2008, 03:14:43 PM by Fishu »

Offline Curlew

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1280
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #64 on: November 17, 2008, 03:31:43 PM »
How about just a uav?
It is I, Ens. Pulver! And I have just thrown your palm tree overboard!
Quote from: Helm
The best cure for "wife ack" is to deploy chaff:    $...$$....$....$$$.....$ .....$$$.....$ ....$$

Callsign---Curlew

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #65 on: November 17, 2008, 09:33:50 PM »
The only way a UAV would get enough coverage is to fast-fwd a few years when armed long-endurance high altitude UAVs with automated inflight refuelling become operational.  Even the new Reaper can't remain on-station long enough or fly fast enough to be effective, and it also only carries 2xJDAM and 2xhellfire.

The problem with adding lots of weapons to the really long-endurance UAVs is that those UAVs will be tolerated as spy planes only as long as they remain unarmed.  Arming the global hawk would pretty much guarantee that it will lose access to some airspace and be immediately attacked in some areas.  If I recall correctly, that's one reason why we didn't press forward with armed SR-71 variants...  It made shooting them down more justifiable.
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #66 on: November 18, 2008, 04:55:49 AM »
Just smack the UAV itself into the pirate boats then :devil
Anyway, don't they sometimes operate from a bigger vessel?
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #67 on: November 18, 2008, 06:24:33 AM »
Any Broncos in 'moth balls'?

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Re: Somali Pirates - I don't get it.
« Reply #68 on: November 18, 2008, 06:29:04 AM »
The problem with adding lots of weapons to the really long-endurance UAVs is that those UAVs will be tolerated as spy planes only as long as they remain unarmed.  Arming the global hawk would pretty much guarantee that it will lose access to some airspace and be immediately attacked in some areas.  If I recall correctly, that's one reason why we didn't press forward with armed SR-71 variants...  It made shooting them down more justifiable.

I don't think the somalis will care about it. They already have armed ships in their waters shooting at the pirates whenever possible. UCAV wouldn't be much of a change to the current situation.