
04-05-2007, 12:46 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,186
|
|
What is the conclusion?
It would seem that while operating so close to Iranian waters, the current craft used to board and inspect Cargo ships are woefully under armed or protected from Iranian coastal patrol boats.
If they carried more punch, the Iranians wouldn't have gained the upper hand. What's everybody elses slant on this and does anybody know what the US equivalent is ?
|

04-05-2007, 03:27 PM
|
 |
General of the Armies
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland (Ex Irish Army)
Posts: 11,156
|
|
Ohh US... Id say bigger... but dont know...
The big thing about boarding parties is not the size of the boat but the air support it has... an attack chopper in the area would not be long making small work of a couple of attack boats..... Small boats have advantages in speed agility, and whilst lacking firepower, has the ability to paint targets for fighter strikes or line up targets for attack choppers.... its all about defensive tactics employed... tooling up with big boats does not make for sound tactical judgement... theres many ways to skin a cat.... close air support IMO is the way to go...
__________________
 "Barrel High, Powder Dry!"
"Illic est haud effrego ex Veneratio"
|

04-05-2007, 04:59 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,186
|
|
So we need Apache aircover?
|

04-05-2007, 05:08 PM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chagrin Falls, OH
Posts: 1,868
|
|
Do the Royal Marines have a FAST equivalent?
US FAST Marines are specialized in this stuff. If you have 3 per boarding craft and up armor them with .50 Cal M2s and a couple of AT4s, I think the problem goes away.
Apache and AH-1Z cover is going to be too time consuming, you need a more impressive stance at the front of the confrontation. You get a couple of FAST marines with AT4s pointing at a Iranian Craft, they are gonna tend to stand down.
__________________
SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM
|

04-05-2007, 06:14 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,186
|
|
I think there are an array of weaknesses here. I'm curious to know what was view from the Frigate. They must have seen these boats approaching 
|

04-05-2007, 07:27 PM
|
|
Command Sergeant Major
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 341
|
|
Well, the US NAVY conducts MIO with their VBSS teams from RHIBS. They usually have 1 heavy machine gun per boat. The boat crew themselves are armed with shotgun's, M-16's, and Mk-18's.
In the event of a boarding meets the critera of a Non-compliant boarding. The mother ship itself, or a helicopter gunship is required to be well within range of the suspect vessel.
Its my understanding that the british sailors were undergoing a routine boarding mission with a compliant ship, that was co-operating fine with the boarding team.
If that was the same siuation with a U.S. boarding team. There might not have been a helicopter required to be within range to assist the boarding team against a small boat attack.
|

04-05-2007, 08:00 PM
|
 |
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chagrin Falls, OH
Posts: 1,868
|
|
I think a bigger presence such as AT4s and more M2s would solve it with specially trained forces such as FAST.
__________________
SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM
|

04-06-2007, 02:57 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,186
|
|
Another factor to bare in mind here is we were carrying this duty out in accordance with UN resolution 1723 and that we are not at war with Iran .But coupled with our previous experience in 2004 and the current political situation . I'm surprised this has happened.
The same boat crew that were abducted were filmed the previous week as part of a documentary. You can quite clearly hear one of the RM officers the week previous asking the skipper of a boat if he was aware of any Iranian activity in the area.....So they arn't just inspecting boats they're collecting intel as well, which makes sense.
|

04-06-2007, 03:45 AM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,186
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperAlpha1
I think a bigger presence such as AT4s and more M2s would solve it with specially trained forces such as FAST.
|
I don't see how Fast marines could have reacted quickly enough in this scenario ...The boarding party had left the ship and were back in their RHIB's when the they were detained.
I think the finger points at HMS Cornwall ....why wasn't it in a position to support the smaller craft?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBMcCain
Well, the US NAVY conducts MIO with their VBSS teams from RHIBS. They usually have 1 heavy machine gun per boat. The boat crew themselves are armed with shotgun's, M-16's, and Mk-18's.
|
Our kit isn't that much different then.
Last edited by Texas; 04-06-2007 at 04:09 AM..
|

04-06-2007, 07:59 AM
|
 |
General of the Armies
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ireland (Ex Irish Army)
Posts: 11,156
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SniperAlpha1
Apache and AH-1Z cover is going to be too time consuming, you need a more impressive stance at the front of the confrontation. You get a couple of FAST marines with AT4s pointing at a Iranian Craft, they are gonna tend to stand down.
|
Dont agree Snips... Larger ships to take on gun boats, especially more then one do not tactically add up.... Tex has a point if the Parent ship is not in range for fire support, then there needs to an explaination for it.... Our Frigates always are... However, the fastest way of getting tactical fire support to a boarding party for non complaint craft or ambush situation like the British had is attack chopper cover.... Frigates can carry choppers which can be used as recon/air support to any at risk boarding operation...
__________________
 "Barrel High, Powder Dry!"
"Illic est haud effrego ex Veneratio"
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:22 AM.
|