Author Topic: Tanker War 2.0  (Read 20951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,904
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,107
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #100 on: July 11, 2019, 12:32:59 »
In my mind I picture this perfect situation where the Montrose was on the disengaged side of the tanker and the Iranian gun boats didn't see her until she came around to defend the tanker, in which case the Iranian would have gone from feeling all confident and superior to "OH crap!".
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Spencer100

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 13,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 503

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #102 on: July 16, 2019, 20:05:44 »
If the IRG took it then it will show up on satellite. I could see them grabbing it to exchange.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #103 on: July 17, 2019, 11:02:17 »
Iran reports that it broke down and has been towed into their waters for repairs.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,042
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,494
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #104 on: July 17, 2019, 19:38:56 »
And the crew have been enjoying the hospitality of their rescuers so much that they completely forgot to phone home and let everybody know that everything was just fine...?

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,945
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #105 on: July 17, 2019, 20:59:06 »
The fleshpots of the Iranian coast are well-known as being nigh impossible to tear oneself away from.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #106 on: July 17, 2019, 23:12:46 »
Can you say convoy ?

Offline SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 154,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,540
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #107 on: July 18, 2019, 00:46:02 »
Can you say convoy ?

10-4, Rubberducky?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #108 on: July 18, 2019, 01:11:09 »
Can you say convoy ?

Good luck getting them to wait to form a convoy, convoys are an efficient way to protect the movement of goods, but not an efficient way to move them. There is only so much terminal space to fill up tankers, so the first tanker may have to wait 3-5 days before the rest are filled. Empties would be easier, but you still wait till they get X number of ships and for naval vessels you need a at least 1 guard ship at the outer end of the system to protect ships waiting. Likely 2-3 per convoy and you likely have an outbound and inbound, so there is at least 6. You need to protect the ships at the terminal, so that is a number of smaller patrol craft with 1-2 bigger units patrolling for subs. Then you need roving patrols and mine hunters, who will also need protection. Double those numbers to provide any longterm coverage.

Offline Spencer100

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 13,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 503

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #110 on: July 18, 2019, 12:14:23 »
48 km wide there, sound like the ship was in Iranian waters picking up oil and perhaps avoiding paying off the right people. Anyone with a paid AIS account may be able to go and look at their historical AIS data.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #111 on: July 18, 2019, 18:26:14 »

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #113 on: July 19, 2019, 14:58:17 »
Iran took a UK tanker today. The time to talk has passed now its time for payback.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/uk-flagged-tanker-seized-by-irans-revolutionary-guard-in-strait-of-hormuz

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 307,971
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,215
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #114 on: July 19, 2019, 15:24:25 »
Iran took a UK tanker today. The time to talk has passed now its time for payback.

https://www.foxnews.com/world/uk-flagged-tanker-seized-by-irans-revolutionary-guard-in-strait-of-hormuz

Start sinking Iranian water craft.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #115 on: July 19, 2019, 15:50:14 »
A second Uk operated tanker has been seized. Both vessels are now in Iranian waters. Looks like the SBS or SEALs has their work cut out for them. I think the administration is trying to get European nations that rely on the Gulf to start protecting their tankers.

https://www.foxnews.com
« Last Edit: July 19, 2019, 16:21:57 by tomahawk6 »

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 54,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,782
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #116 on: July 19, 2019, 18:47:33 »
Latest from Haaretz website in Israel:

Quote
U.K. Says Iran Seized Two of Its Tankers in Strait of Hormuz; Tehran Denies Capturing Second Vessel

Revolutionary Guards said first vessel overtaken for 'violating international waters' ■ Iranian media reports second boat was not captured but only warned ■ Trump to talk to U.K.
Reuters

Jul 19, 2019 10:20 PM

    Iran releases video showing seized oil tanker matches disappeared UAE vessel
    U.S. destroyed Iranian drone in Strait of Hormuz, Trump says; Tehran denies
    Iranian state media airs video said to disprove U.S. report of downed drone

Britain's foreign secretary said Iranian authorities seized two vessels Friday in the Strait of Hormuz, actions signaling an escalation in the strategic waterway that has become a flashpoint in tensions between Tehran and the West.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said one of the seized ships was British-flagged and the other sailed under Liberia's flag. The crews members comprise a range of nationalities but are not believed to include British citizens, he said.

"These seizures are unacceptable," Hunt said entering an emergency government meeting to discuss securing the release of the two vessels and their crews. "It is essential that freedom of navigation is maintained and that all ships can move safely and freely in the region."

Shortly after, Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency said the Liberian-flagged ship Mesdar was not captured. "Despite reports, the ship has not been seized ... and was allowed to continue its course after being warned about safety issues by Iranian forces," the report said. The capture of the British-flagged Stena Impero has been confirmed by Iran.

Details of what took place remained sketchy. Iran said earlier Friday that it had seized a British oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

    NEW: A #UK-flagged oil tanker, the "Stena Impero," has 'gone dark' after diverting towards #Iran waters amid a "hostile action" by #IRGC elements.

    Sources say the vessel now appears to be headed towards an #IRGC facility in Qeshm, #Iran.

    Emergency #UK security meeting underway. pic.twitter.com/zqjkvwJTiR
    — Charles Lister (@Charles_Lister) July 19, 2019

The tanker Stena Impero was taken to an Iranian port because it was not complying with "international maritime laws and regulations," Iran's Revolutionary Guard declared.

A statement from Stena Bulk, which owns the tanker, said it was unable to contact the ship after it was approached by unidentified vessels and a helicopter in the Strait of Hormuz.

The company said the tanker, with 23 crew members aboard, was in international waters when it was approached but subsequently appeared to be heading toward Iran.

U.K. Chamber of Shipping chief executive Bob Sanguinetti said the seizure represented an escalation in tensions in the Persian Gulf and made it clear more protection for merchant vessels was urgently needed.

He claimed the action is "in violation of international regulations which protect ships and their crews as they go about their legitimate business in international waters."

The British government should do "whatever is necessary" to ensure the safe and swift return of the ship's crew, Sanguinetti said.

    #IRGC releases #video footage showing the US drone that US claims to have downed monitoring #USSBoxer before and after the vessel sailed through the Strait of Hormuz.#Iran pic.twitter.com/XThyAV7rPJ
    — Iran (@Iran) July 19, 2019

The incident came just two days after Washington claimed that a U.S. warship downed an Iranian drone in the Strait. Iran denied that it lost an aircraft in the area and released a video that is said disproved the incident.

On June 20, Iran shot down an American drone in the same waterway, and Trump came close to retaliating but called off an airstrike at the last moment.

Tensions in the region have been growing since the Trump administration withdrew a year ago from Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

After the withdrawal, the U.S. imposed harsh sanctions, including on Tehran's oil trade, that have sent the Iranian economy into a tailspin.

Iran's government has desperately tried to get out of the chokehold, appealing to the other partners in the deal, particularly Europe, to pressure the U.S. to lift the bruising sanctions. Europe wants to maintain the nuclear deal, but has not been able to address Iranian demands, particularly concerning the sale of oil, without violating U.S. sanctions.

On Friday, Iran and the United States emphatically disagreed over Washington's claim that a U.S. warship downed an Iranian drone in the Strait of Hormuz. American officials said they used electronic jamming to bring down the unmanned aircraft, while Iran said it simply didn't happen.
Neither side provided evidence to prove its claim.

At the White House, President Donald Trump said flatly of the Iranian drone: "We shot it down." But Pentagon and other officials have said repeatedly that the USS Boxer, a Navy ship in the Strait of Hormuz, actually jammed the drone's signal, causing it to crash, and did not fire a missile. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive technology.

Trump's national security adviser, John Bolton, said, "There is no question this was an Iranian drone, and the USS Boxer took it out as the president announced yesterday because it posed a threat to the ship and its crew. It's entirely the right thing to do."

In Tehran, the Iranian military said all its drones had returned safely to their bases and denied there was any confrontation with the USS Boxer, an amphibious assault ship.

"We have not lost any drone in the Strait of Hormuz nor anywhere else," tweeted Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard on its website Friday said the drone recorded three hours of video of the USS Boxer and five other vessels Thursday beginning when the ships first entered the Strait of Hormuz. There was no immediate explanation as to how the video was evidence that no Iranian drone was destroyed.

The strategically vital Strait of Hormuz is at the mouth of the Persian Gulf and serves as the passageway for one-fifth of all global crude exports.

Trump on Thursday said the USS Boxer took action after the Iranian drone closed to within 1,000 yards of the warship and ignored commands to stay away. The president accused Iran of "provocative and hostile" action and said the U.S. acted in self-defense.

The Revolutionary Guard said its forces continue to monitor all movements by foreigners — especially "the terrorist forces" of the U.S. and the British in the Strait and the Gulf.

After Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal with world powers last year and imposed economic sanctions against Tehran, the Iranians have pushed back on the military front in recent weeks, with Washington accusing Tehran of threatening American forces and interests in the region.

Iran's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, suggested in New York as he arrived for a meeting at the United Nations that Iran could immediately ratify an agreement to allow broader checks of its nuclear facilities by U.N. inspectors if the U.S. dropped its sanctions.

China urged Washington to consider the offer, calling it "a positive signal that Iran is willing to seek a compromise solution."

The Pentagon said Thursday's incident happened in international waters while the Boxer was entering the Gulf. The Boxer is among several U.S. Navy ships in the area, including the USS Abraham Lincoln, an aircraft carrier that has been operating in the North Arabian Sea for weeks in response to rising tensions.

The Iranians and Americans have had close encounters in the Strait of Hormuz in the past, and it is not unprecedented for Iran to fly a drone near a U.S. warship.

Zarif blamed Washington for the escalation and accused the Trump administration of "trying to starve our people" and "deplete our treasury" through sanctions.

Link
"Leave one wolf alive, and the sheep are never safe."

Arya Stark

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 54,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,782
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #117 on: July 19, 2019, 19:03:10 »
From the Marine Traffic website showing the track for the Steno Impero. Last hit was six hours and thirty minutes ago and you can see its heading directly for Iran.

"Leave one wolf alive, and the sheep are never safe."

Arya Stark

Offline NavyShooter

    Boaty McBoatface!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 187,921
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,136
  • Death from a Bar.....one shot, one Tequilla
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #118 on: July 19, 2019, 19:41:20 »
I believe this is under the columns of 'un-good' and 'higher gas prices coming soon'...

Insert disclaimer statement here....

:panzer:

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 73,935
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,945
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #119 on: July 19, 2019, 21:18:38 »
>higher gas prices coming soon

I wish.  A prolonged period of very high gas prices would be a useful piece of information to add to the usual debates about resource extraction and pollution mitigation.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #120 on: July 19, 2019, 22:37:43 »
Both the US and Canada are exporters so higher prices would be good. but not good for Japan and Europe.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 149,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,710
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #121 on: July 20, 2019, 00:01:46 »
Meanwhile IRGC  release "drone" footage (with what looks to be a Huey 500 skid in it)  https://www.almasdarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/t_video5877479203443574499.mp4?_=1

Offline Retired AF Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 54,740
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,782
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #122 on: July 20, 2019, 09:35:12 »
Both the US and Canada are exporters so higher prices would be good. but not good for Japan and Europe.

Actually, after the US, Saudi Arabia is the second largest exporter of oil to Canada.

Quote
Last year [2018], Canadian companies spent $3.54 billion importing 6.4 million cubic metres of Saudi oil, up from 5.9 million cubic metres worth $2.5 billion in 2017, before the dispute started in August 2018.

In January 2019, for example, oil imports from the kingdom were 606,000 cubic metres, up from 559,000 cubic metres a year earlier. And although monthly imports gyrate significantly — a normal trend in the oil business, according to analysts — the long-term trend is unmistakable.   

"Over five years, imports from Saudi have increased," said David Hughes, a former research manager with the Geological Survey of Canada and president of Global Sustainability Research, a consultancy in Calgary. In January 2019, Saudi oil accounted for roughly 10 per cent of Canadian consumption, up from about eight per cent in 2017, he said.

Source:  Canada's oil imports from Saudi Arabia on the rise since 2014, trade figures show. 28 April 2019
"Leave one wolf alive, and the sheep are never safe."

Arya Stark

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 142,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,705
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #123 on: July 20, 2019, 12:01:53 »
Quite correct RAFG, as this table from the GoC shows:

https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/snpsht/2019/03-03mprtscrdl-eng.html

However, Canada is still, overall, a net exporter of oil, and about 75% of our actual consumption is locally sourced. So, making the loss of 18% of the last 25% of consumption (i.e. about 4.5% ) would not be a big deal, especially since we produce more than we consume to start with.

For instance, if you look at Quebec in the table I refer to, you can see that, eventhough overall consumption in Quebec rose a bit in the last few years, the oil imports have gone down in real terms, as has the percentage from the Kingdom. That's because the refineries here have greatly increased their consumption of Alberta and Newfoundland oil - but mostly Alberta's since it's the cheapest around.

Yet another way Quebec is sticking it's tongue out at Alberta, I guess.  ;D

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 113,620
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,041
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #124 on: July 20, 2019, 18:27:30 »