Before anyone suggests that the cruise ship should pay for a Naval escort here is a little education about the role of the Navy.

It is good to see that the Navy is still fulfilling its protection of shipping roles POS. POS is one of the many tasks governments train navies to do so as to protect their interests and citizens abroad and to keep the seas safe for trade. Performing POS is a demonstration of the ability as well as real time training for a Naval vessel and crew.

I have noticed there are uninformed people who would insult the sailors of the Navy and suggest that they should be paid for escort duties by shipping companies. This is far from what the Navy is for and sailors are not hired mercinaries but there to protect and defend its country's national interests. It is insulting and reeks of greed to suggest that shipping companies must pay governments for a Naval escort. Such people should really educate themselves as to the purpose of the Navy and what motivates the men who serve before uttering unintelligent remarks about paying for an Naval escort.

[ 01-22-2009: Message edited by: Sutho ]

If the ship / owner CHOOSES to put the ship at risk then they should fork out.

As for the Navy, let us hope that no one else was attacked while they were putting on a show including helicopter etc. escorting Arcadia which by its very nature is a very low risk target.

The navy role in protecting ships and sea lanes etc does not extend to providing escort services unless there is a specific identified threat to that ship which by the way is not British being registered in Hamilton and is American owned. As for training - the UK Navy requires training on how to escort a cruise ship ?!

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:
The Navy of any country including the UK is not there to provide escort services to any merchant vessel when it is that ship's / ship owner's CHOICE to put the ship and pax at risk especially for purely profit reasons. Numerous ships are using the Cape route instead of the Gulf of Aden and if there is concern then they should simply do what many other shipping lines are doing and simply not go there. As for "freedom" of choice / travel etc, so much rubbish, it is like going on holiday to Iraq and saying well I have the freedom to do so and then moaning when you get shot or injured.

If the ship / owner CHOOSES to put the ship at risk then they should fork out.

As for the Navy, let us hope that no one else was attacked while they were putting on a show including helicopter etc. escorting Arcadia which by its very nature is a very low risk target.

The navy role in protecting ships and sea lanes etc does not extend to providing escort services unless there is a specific identified threat to that ship which by the way is not British being registered in Hamilton and is American owned. As for training - the UK Navy requires training on how to escort a cruise ship ?!

If these navies and governments had spent half as much energy (and money) in dealing with the problem before it became one they would not be required in the first place. One can hope that after this last Tuesday wiser more forward thinking heads are being applied.

---

Get an education before uttering unintelligent unthought out remarks.

Naval ships purposes are there to provide escort duties and Protection of Shipping. They have been doing so since early days and in WWII to get through U boat patrols.

If you did not read or understand it is a role of the Navy to provide escorts and even escorting a vessel provides valuable training to the ships crew.

Bermuda just happens to be part of the British colonies and Arcadia is British owned by money held on the London Stock Exchange. Bermuda is a British Overseas Territory with Queen Elizabeth II as Head of State and the flag has the Union Jack on it. Your comments also infer that the British should only be interested in protecting their own property and money which is close to racist and offensive to a nation that provides help and assistance to other nations around the world.

Your remarks are insulting to the navy and nothing but unintelligent dribbe. A cruise ship is not a low risk target. How much money do you think are in the ships vaults if pirates got on and demanded it?

Putting on a helicopter shos is not dangerous and risking other ships to attack. Helicopters provide a vital search and protection role and it is important that they operate. Having a helicopter in the air provides a quick response to a threat opposed to having to launch a helicopter when a ship is in distress.

Get an education and learn what the purpose of the Navy is for before insulting them! They are there to extend infulence abroad and protect their own citizens and extend the interests of its national country.

It is in the National interest of every contry to keep shipping lanes and trade routs open, and having a warship there to provide escorts, patrol the area, protect ships sends a message to those who dare attack any vessel on the seas.

Wake up to yourself.

[ 01-22-2009: Message edited by: Sutho ]

My friend Tom Newton Dunn reported earlier this week that HMS Portland is part of a US-led mission to combat the pirates.

Examples were that I took exception to the fact it was brought up the Navy may have recklesly endangered lives of shipping by performing a flyby to salute the Arcadia and the suggestion that the HMS Portlands presence near Arcadia was leaving other vessels open to attack.

Maintaining visual contact with civillian vessesls is important for identification, forming a relationship with the vessel to act as a potential intelligence collector for the Naval vessel. The Navy performs these roles to keep the shipping lanes safe and open for free transit for trade and passenger movement. Without trade the world would come to a halt and some countries could not survive.

Escorting a cruise ship provides escort training for a naval vessel and allows the naval vessel to collect intelligence and calobrate electronic systems used to track vessels. The HMS Portland by closing within visual range of the Arcadia was able to make a secure ID and hold a secure track on the vessel and use its sensors to monitor and keep the seas clear in its Position of Intended Movement.

Given your previous comments about you "using" crew on cruise ships and about the citizens of Somalia etc your accusation that I am racist is at best ironic.

Any comparison to WWII and the U boats is laughable and silly.

Your response is laughable and silly. Completely uneducated and uninformed to say the least. As always with you you fail to comprehend the easiest examples of warships escorting merchent vessels. Comparing destroyers in WWII escorting convoys is an example of a Naval operation that involves warships escorting merchant vessels.

Arcadia is a high risk target. With up to 2000 passengers and pirates charging ransom per head it will certainly stir up trouble if they could capture a cruise ship.

Have you any idea the amount of money in the ships vaults exist. Another reason it is a high risk targed for a board and grab operation by pirates.

Escorting the Arcadia is certainly not grandstanding. It is all part of the patrols and escorting is nothing new. Allot of vessels going throught the Gulf of Aden get an escort that we do not hear about.

Greetings Ben.

[ 01-23-2009: Message edited by: Maasdam ]

I remember commenting about how close it got for the photo and mentioned that the warship can adequately protect from the horizon.

Like HMS Portland the HMS Van Eversten is helo capable ship and having them in the air with their sensors provides better coverage than the ships sensors at times.

I was waiting to see if someone remembered that cause I remember seeing the comment and thinking wow that is very close and I added a reply saying the ship could do the same job at the horizon.

Apart from that I think the close escorts are only happening for around the Bab El Mandeb.

To meet a warship with a cruise ship of the same country of origin is quite a rare occurence in that part of the world.

Arcadia is not a likely target at all, very difficult to board, she is also fast and would easily avoid and outrun any potential threat. The simple fact of having over 2000 souls on board makes it a very unattractive target as there is no way they could control that number of people given they are few.

Unless P&O have totally reversed their policy (and I worked for them for 9 years as Purser) very little is kept on board. Very few pax use cash and all but the casino is cashless. No payroll is kept but a reasonable float is available. They use company credit cards is required. You have obviously been watching too many movies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike sa:
[...]

Arcadia is not a likely target at all, [...]

---

I guess the opposite is the case. Arcadia is a 'British' ship - this (sadly) makes her more of a target than other ships.

quote:

---

Originally posted by greybeard:
Although, as usual, Sutho is unable to conduct an argument without descending to childish insults ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Globaliser:
In this case, the insults seemed to have started as a pre-emptive strike, before the argument kicked off!

I love watching handbags being swung ...

---

Hmmm no handback fight yest waiting fore it with my pink lether handback

As for 2000 passengers they are easily controlled. Try pointing a gun at them and it will soon show them whos boss. You have got to remember that pirates are armed with not only guns but RPG's, grapling hooks, knifes everything.

As for bringing Connie Rices opinion into this, isnt she part of an unpopular administration that the US could not wait to see the back of? dont get me wrong this is not US bashing, but you dont have to live in the US to see world headlines that the Bush administration was considered a failure and the US couldnt wait to see the back of them!