Skip to comments.U.S. Navy Ship Outruns Pursuing Pirates
Posted on 05/07/2009 10:35:54 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Suspected pirates failed in an effort to attack a U.S. Navy ship off the eastern coast of Somalia. the Navy said Thursday.
Two skiffs, assumed to be pirate vessels, chased the Lewis and Clark, a dry cargo and ammunition ship supporting the Navy's Fifth Fleet, for more than an hour Wednesday before giving up, CNN reported.
During the pursuit, the skiffs fired small arms at the Lewis and Clark and got within one nautical mile before the ship used evasive maneuvers and pulled out of range.
How utterly embarrassing...
Running away: The Obama doctrine.
Also according to the Wiki article on the USNS Lewis and Clark, she nominally carries a crew of about 120 civilian sailors and a detachment of 49 military—roles and services not specified. Plus, this class of replenishment ship isn’t armed, but it *can* carry two helicopters.
Take your racist vomit and shove it up your bum.
The 40 ships of Military Sealift Command's Naval Fleet Auxiliary Force are the supply lines to U.S. Navy ships at sea. These ships provide virtually everything that Navy ships need, including fuel, food, ordnance, spare parts, mail and other supplies. NFAF ships enable the Navy fleet to remain at sea, on station and combat ready for extended periods of time. NFAF ships also conduct towing, rescue and salvage operations or serve as floating medical facilities.
All NFAF ships are government owned and crewed by civil service mariners. Some of the ships also have a small contingent of Navy personnel aboard for operations support, supply coordination and helicopter operations.
Shouldn’t that say OUT-GUNS Somali pirates...
Outruns, what is this shit sounds like the black house is running the anti pirate scheme.
Then put some guns on it. Big ass guns.
“It was a dry cargo and ammunition ship, not a combat vessel.”
That’s correct, and I would believe the keyword here is “ammunition”.
Seems to me the best thing for an unarmed, under contract to the Navy vessel full of ammunition to do is haul a...., er,...uh, Haul tail out of there.
I think they done good. (A little Joe Don Baker there)
Pitiful. Like a hawk chased by blue jays.
They really do need to stick Marine detachments back on those ships.
One thing that would’ve been different had the pirates actually tried to board, though—the Maersk Alabama had a crew of, what, twenty? These 24,000-ton beasts have a crew of around 170, including dozens of military personnel. Even if the Lewis and Clarks’s crew only had small arms—hell, even if they only had baseball bats—those pirates would’ve been in for a shock to suddenly run up against that many people.
This is satire of some kind, right?
Are you sure this particular class of vessel has both .50cals and Mk19's? I've never been aboard a MSC cargo ship, so I certainly could be mistaken. But, I always thought that because of the limitations of "ships under arms" with respect to navigational routes and right-of-ways, that these ships were only minimally armed.
While this is true, surely this ship has provisions to carry .50 caliber machine gun mounts -- and they should have some small arms aboard.
They RAN AWAY instead of engaging?
What is going on?
For those unfamiliar, Google "boo go shot" and follow the trail, eventually it will lead you to a very funny audio clip from Atlanta.....
>>It was a dry cargo and ammunition ship, not a combat vessel.<<
So such a ship is either 1) unarmed or 2) unescorted?
That doesn’t make sense.
How can a ship carrying ammunition not be armed?