Pirates target the wrong ship - a navy frigate

[RedRalph]

Yeah, many pirates of the financial seas reside there Next time the French should invade the main island as a suspected pirate hub...

----

Anyway, why don't they set up an international tribunal to deal with piracy? I'd just toss them into the water and let Judge Shark decide the punishment, but since executing a bunch of terrorists is so politically incorrect now, let's at least imprison them.

Do the French still have some prison colonies?

The Russians have suggested this... are you on the Kremlin's payroll now

 

[Patroklos]

Let me try.

1.) warship (not really valid, to have that angle you would be really close).
2.) utility boat of some sort
3.) ocean tug
4.) warship
5.) looks like a government science vessel of some sort
6.) could be a nations coast guard vessel, but NOAH vessels also have similar colors.

 

[Falcon02]

I think it's also worthy to note in this Merchant vs. Military ship Identification discussion, that the French Captain steered into the sun to help disguise their vessel more.

At around 0500 GMT (1500 AEST) the French vessel moved into the sun to keep its cover.

"They're speeding right towards us," Le Quilliec marvelled. "Let's just head into the sun and then we'll turn around to hit them head on."

It's something that has a long history in military strategy to use the Sun to help prevent the enemy from really being able to see you. The Light of the sun helps to blind your adversary ranging from completely hiding your approach to preventing the enemy from seeing details.

After initially seeing a floating dot in the distance that looked promising I can see the Pirates going after it, and continuing to follow it into the sun, but being unable to catch details that might reveal it was a Warship instead of a Merchant ship. Also, this suggests the distinctive gun was facing away from the pirates (on the other side of the tower) and as such not visible by the pirates.

 

[Steph]

And if they head toward the sun, with the pirates chasing
1) They give the impression they are trying to flee
2) They show the rear of the ship (and the gun is on the front, so it's harder to see)
3) If they present the rear and not the side, the silhouette is not visivle, and it's harder to identify it.

 

[Mise]

Exactly! I mean, the French ship was trying to fool them into thinking it were a merchant vessel, thus luring them into a trap...

 

[Masada]

1. I can't quite tell. Could be. Probably is. Would ditch my weapons if I were a pirate. [Warship]
2. Is obvious [Civvy]
3. Is obvious [Civvy]
4. Ditch weapons. [Warship]
5. is obvious. [Civvy]
6. looks off color, funnel is to far forward, superstructure to low. Although the array on it looks big... [Civvy]

1 & 6 gave me the most issues. If in doubt abort.

 

[Bugfatty300]

THEY MEAN TO TAKE US AS A PRIZE BWAHAHAHAHA

 

[Flying Pig]

All ships fly colors at sea (well, they're supposed to, anyway). As to the "has a gun", see below.

Under the circumstances it is a bit more excusable, but if you think about it warships are sleek and look designed for speed while cargo vessels are basically cuboids. Before long, someone must have said "er, sir, you don't think this is a trap, do you?"

Are you talking about an AK?

Yep - the weapon which made it possible to fight a war with five minutes of training and actually have a chance of winning - tiny recoil, almost impossible to break, massive fire rate and part of the mechanism is string.

 

[Patroklos]

tiny recoil

You have obviously never fired one, it has one of the worst kicks of all modern assault weapons and this has been true for the entirety of its existance.

 

[IglooDame]

Let me try.

1.) warship (not really valid, to have that angle you would be really close).
2.) utility boat of some sort
3.) ocean tug
4.) warship
5.) looks like a government science vessel of some sort
6.) could be a nations coast guard vessel, but NOAH vessels also have similar colors.

1. I can't quite tell. Could be. Probably is. Would ditch my weapons if I were a pirate. [Warship]
2. Is obvious [Civvy]
3. Is obvious [Civvy]
4. Ditch weapons. [Warship]
5. is obvious. [Civvy]
6. looks off color, funnel is to far forward, superstructure to low. Although the array on it looks big... [Civvy]

1 & 6 gave me the most issues. If in doubt abort.

You both got them right.

Under the circumstances it is a bit more excusable, but if you think about it warships are sleek and look designed for speed while cargo vessels are basically cuboids. Before long, someone must have said "er, sir, you don't think this is a trap, do you?"

Or even...

Yep - the weapon which made it possible to fight a war with five minutes of training and actually have a chance of winning - tiny recoil, almost impossible to break, massive fire rate and part of the mechanism is string.

I don't think the pirates' success in the Indian Ocean is really all that attributable to the sort of rifle they're using; for starters the rate of fire doesn't matter if they only have a few mags' worth of ammo in the boat, for another the recoil isn't all that tiny.

 

[Flying Pig]

You have obviously never fired one, it has one of the worst kicks of all modern assault weapons and this has been true for the entirety of its existance.

The new-ish AK-74 has half the recoil of an M-16 and two-thirds that of a -47; which means that if we take m to be the m-16 recoiland a the AK-47 then:

2a/3 = m/2

So: 4a/3 = m

So: 4/3a = m

a = m - a/3

So; it has less recoil than the yankee gun; which the SAS have used on various occasions, and the modern -74 has far less. Rate of fire is important for close-up fighting unless really well trained (the only unit that I've seen fight at close range without just pumping out was the SAS) and boats fit that description. But yes; the fact that they use a good rifle is probably not the primary reason for their success.

 

[Cutlass]

The new-ish AK-74 has half the recoil of an M-16 and two-thirds that of a -47; which means that if we take m to be the m-16 recoiland a the AK-47 then:

2a/3 = m/2

So: 4a/3 = m

So: 4/3a = m

a = m - a/3

So; it has less recoil than the yankee gun; which the SAS have used on various occasions, and the modern -74 has far less. Rate of fire is important for close-up fighting unless really well trained (the only unit that I've seen fight at close range without just pumping out was the SAS) and boats fit that description. But yes; the fact that they use a good rifle is probably not the primary reason for their success.

An M-16 has a pretty trivial recoil. It's hard to believe that any gun firing a 7.62x39mm has less than that

 

[Flying Pig]

True; but you see that the new one is probably not too bad - but I'm not sure if it's anything like as common as the older version.

 

[Cutlass]

The AK-74 fires a 5.45mm round. So it's got to be less recoil than the AK-47.

 

[Bugfatty300]

AK-74: Introduced in 1974. Pretty much a copy of the old AKM only in a different caliber.

New and modern? I don't think so.

 

[Patroklos]

The new-ish AK-74 has half the recoil of an M-16 and two-thirds that of a -47

Do you think the pirates are running around with brand new AK-74s, or with had me down 47s from wars spanning the last five decades?

 

[woody60707]

I missed it. Why does it matter what AK they are using?

 

[Patroklos]

He claimed the AK47 had a light recoil for the purpose of letting untrained children effectivly pirate.

 

[woody60707]

ahhh ok. xchar

 

[Flying Pig]

AK-74: Introduced in 1974. Pretty much a copy of the old AKM only in a different caliber.

New and modern? I don't think so.

New and modern as opposed to the old and antiquated (and wooden) original.