I do not know who this company is and what their rules of engagement were, so if anyone has anything to add, feel free to do so in the comments. Warning shots were ordered first, but as the attackers kept coming, then the defenders had to open up and repel the attack. Also notice that ‘two’ skiffs attacked, and this seems to be the common tactic of pirates–or to work in pairs. Good on these security contractors and it looks like their defenses and planning worked. –Matt
Edit: 5/08/2012 It looks like the folks at Lloyd’s List were able to get some information about this video. The ship was an Eagle Bulk Shipping vessel, and the security force was Trident Group. Here is a statement from the owner of Trident Group about this incident.
In an emailed statement to Lloyd’s List, Trident president Tom Rothrauff said: “This action came 72 hours following another attack by this exact same pirate action group against this very same vessel. Further, the same PAG had attacked a tanker in the week prior, so this was a killer PAG. Our team acted with poise, and used every rule for the use of force as prescribed by the US Coast Guard in PSA 3-09.
“The skiff was identified as carrying RPG’s and AK 47’s. The team was compelled to wait before they initiated warning shots until the master gave permission to the team to release repelling force. When the warning shots were fired, it just so happened that the skiff opened up on our team at the exact same time.”
Excellent work! I guess the warning shots are a nice gesture but I sure don't see the need for them.
Comment by Clay — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 12:13 PM
Judging by the voice of the apparent Team Leader, its good to see that what is possibly an AMERICAN Security Detail is gettin' the job done, and corretly. Good on ya boy's ! Represent !
Comment by American Maritime — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 12:27 PM
just an example to take the lead, whereas governments are still hesitant to take action against this kind of terrorism.
Comment by Janny Kok — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 3:50 PM
The Firm Is INternational Ocean Logistics a US Firm.
Comment by Ed Thompson — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 4:27 PM
Warning shots???
Blow them out of the water. They are Pirates! Piracy is a serious crime that often causes loss of life. Show them no mercy.
Comment by William — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 4:55 PM
Good job by the security guys.
Good on them!!
Comment by Old-man! — Friday, April 6, 2012 @ 6:40 PM
great news, blast them out of the water.
Comment by tony wilding — Saturday, April 7, 2012 @ 2:59 AM
While I personally support the idea of killing them… historically it worked to all but eliminate the pirate threat on the oceans, the unfortunate reality is that there are laws governing the use of weapons on a merchant vessel in accordance with vessel flag state laws and this team came very, very close to landing themselves in serious legal trouble.
Consider that the majority of flag states- rightly or wrongly, I have my own opinion- follow a similar model the the UK. Force is permitted in self defence or defence of others, but that force must be proportional, legitimate, necessary etc etc. Force can be used only when ALL other methods of deterring the threat have been used. That means presence, audio warnings, visual warnings, warning shots, disabling shots, deadly force. Had they been forced to use deadly force to eliminate the threat they could potentially have issues proving that they used all other options prior to the use of deadly force. Also by not firing until the skiffs were maybe 300 metres away they gave one of their best advantages which is distance, this allows the use of the escalation of force advocated by the shipping industry without it of necessity being almost in the face.
The reality of maritime security is that it is becoming more highly regulated, even more so than Iraq has become. Just last week guidance on RUF policies were issued by BIMCO. A security company that does not follow the new guidelines will quickly find itself unusable by major shipping companies.
As I said I don't necessarily like the limitations on force, but that is what the shipping industry has decided to implement.
Comment by Alasdair Walton — Saturday, April 7, 2012 @ 9:10 AM
Alasdair,
You are far out to sea, pirates come to harm, you harm first.
Obviously you are intersted in this s*** or are a boss of a maritime company…..switch on fella.
Karl.
Comment by Karl — Saturday, April 7, 2012 @ 12:57 PM
The only thing I can say to these pirates if you mess with the bull you get the horn
Comment by Dan Fancher — Sunday, April 8, 2012 @ 11:44 AM
I’m coming back to this as a colleague familiar with the industry made some interesting comments that are worth sharing. They take an opposing side and show how these guards aren’t really the “experts” that they appear to be.”No excuses, this is a HORRIBLE example of what to do in an approach situation. In fact, I would actually go so far as to say that this is illegal action and certain breach of rules of engagement, namely when firing at the skiff once it has passed the stern of vessel (no longer a threat) and failing on all fronts for domain awareness (second skiff). It is known which company this is and I would have no hesitation in seeing this GoPro video submitted as evidence leading to a prosecution. This is a very poor example of proper tactics, effective watch-keeping, defensive layering, and team leadership.
The team is completely unprepared and let the pirates easily compromise every component of the layered defense approach. Even if their specific kits could act as a long range deterrent (rightly pointed out.. poor calibre and no optics), the team were nowhere near ready. No flares or warning shots were actually fired to deter the first skiff which is also a breach in ROE. Furthermore, they were totally blindsided by the second (alleged) skiff on the starboard side because they were too busy concentrating on the port side and firing at a non-existent threat 300m past stern. They also clearly have no clue how to harden a vessel as the rear areas were covered with pallets which only shatter when hit therefore injuring the shooter. The Team Leader (TL), who is essentially the Bridge Advisor was far too busy running around attempting direct shoots rather than controlling the situation and on top of that, running around where his shooters are actively going loud. He clearly has no control of the situation or his shooters and fails completely to communicate with the Master.
It’s impressive that after wasting all that ammo on a threat that could have easily been mitigated at the first or second layer of defense, that they did not run out of ammunition. (There was also no evidence of pirates returning fire.. watch the video closely.. there are so many clues in it from radio chatter language to BMP hardening to reload durations).”I think these comments are worth listening to. They did go through a lot of ammo, had amateurish defenses (I’ve seen other firms use sandbags or fill up barrels with seawater), and seemed blindsided. Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy that they filled the pirates’ skiff with lead. Nevertheless, the actions of guards like these could create negative effects in the industry that hurt the respectable marsec firms.
Comment by vpi — Friday, April 13, 2012 @ 12:26 PM
VPI, Interesting points. But like I mentioned in the post, I have no idea what the Rules for the Use of Force were for this vessel and security crew. There is no international RUF or ROE or whatever, so to make any legal accusations based on their use of force, without knowing what their particular rules are, is just hot air.
It is also armchair quarterbacking, and to make judgements based on this video alone is not exactly prudent. The video is impressive to watch, but we do not know the before or after, and I wasn’t there– so I am not going to judge. Now if someone is intimately familiar with this incident, then that would be significant. That is my thoughts on this thing. The video is definitely getting a lot of attention and it is getting high traffic on this blog.
Comment by feraljundi — Friday, April 13, 2012 @ 1:10 PM
@feraljundi Good response and I agree with some of your points. Here’s why I am being cynical/playing devil’s advocate about this incident.
I normally step away from armchair quarterbacking but am making an exception here because of the negative impact this event could have on the industry. Earlier this year, some Italian Marines serving as guards for an oil tanker mistook an Indian fishing trawler for a pirate skiff and opened fire, killing two fishermen. This incident hurt the push for having armed guards on vessels. Having videos containing poorly handled engagements (like this one) go viral will keep hurting the push for having self-regulated armed guards (which is bad; I believe that self-regulated armed guards are a good answer to piracy). Thus, it’s important that viewers don’t look for guidance from this video, but instead understand what NOT to do so that they understand how to provide marsec in a professional, effective manner.
Comment by vpi — Friday, April 13, 2012 @ 9:59 PM
@vpi I don’t see that at all with this video. If anything, there is an incredible amount of support for what these guys did. There is also no support for these criminals that attacked them. So morally speaking, they are doing pretty good.
On the PR front, they are doing well too and I have yet to see any call for criminal charges or investigations based on the actions in this video. If that changes, I would like to see link to that news. I would also like to see an AAR if one comes out.
Tactically speaking, I am not going to defend what they did. But I am also not going to judge either. I wasn’t there and I do not know the details or the rules these men were following. We also do not know the before or after of this video, and until we have someone from the company that was there, that can actually fill in these details, then our assessment would just be opinions based on assumptions.
What is important is that they repelled the attack and no one on their side was wounded or killed. They won, the pirates lost.
Comment by feraljundi — Saturday, April 14, 2012 @ 1:06 AM
There’s one thing that we forgot those Skiffes got so close to the shop and who knows whether they were carry RPG’s that ship was very Vulnerable at that point I think those guys decided at the last minute to take care of business in the proper way I was not there so I don’t really know besides what I saw the video I would’ve done the same thing
Comment by Dan Fancher — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 @ 9:01 PM