Iran summons UK ambassador over 'seizure' of super tanker Grace-1 Watch

Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#41
Report 1 week ago
#41
(Original post by Napp)
Whats duplicitous about entering an international waterway?
What reason would the Iranians have to send the vessel around the cape unless it was to hide its destination? The standard practice (far, far cheaper and quicker) is to go through the Suez canal, and even transhipping into smaller vessels for the transit is normal, significantly cheaper and quicker than sending a big tanker south of Africa.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#42
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#42
(Original post by Good bloke)
What reason would the Iranians have to send the vessel around the cape unless it was to hide its destination? The standard practice (far, far cheaper and quicker) is to go through the Suez canal, and even transhipping into smaller vessels for the transit is normal, significantly cheaper and quicker than sending a big tanker south of Africa.
That doesnt make it ipso facto duplicitous, it's not like you can hide a supertanker especially easily.
I would point out though that 1) Someone owns Suez and they aren't on the best of terms with Tehran (sanctions or no sanctions) 2) Taking the longer route is not in of itself a crime (neither is sending oil to your allies)
Although I am rather curious as to what they were doing straying into territorial waters, a somewhat foolish error to make.
0
reply
Harpoon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#43
Report 1 week ago
#43
It is currently cheaper to send a ship around Africa than go through the Suez
(Original post by Good bloke)
What reason would the Iranians have to send the vessel around the cape unless it was to hide its destination? The standard practice (far, far cheaper and quicker) is to go through the Suez canal, and even transhipping into smaller vessels for the transit is normal, significantly cheaper and quicker than sending a big tanker south of Africa.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#44
Report 1 week ago
#44
(Original post by Napp)
Although I am rather curious as to what they were doing straying into territorial waters, a somewhat foolish error to make.
You hide a tanker by turning off its AIS transponder and taking a circuitous route, slowly, as this vessel has done. It took a month longer than would be normal to get around Africa. If you choose to slip through the Staits of Gibraltar on the quiet you have little choice but to pass through EU waters, either Gibraltarian or Spanish.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#45
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#45
(Original post by Good bloke)
You hide a tanker by turning off its AIS transponder and taking a circuitous route, slowly, as this vessel has done. It took a month longer than would be normal to get around Africa. If you choose to slip through the Staits of Gibraltar on the quiet you have little choice but to pass through EU waters, either Gibraltarian or Spanish.
Again, whilst you chose to put a negative inflection on the circuitous route (i have heard no mention of the ship running dark) there is nothing inherently suspicious about this.
Either way, as was my salient point, interning a vessel for sanction busting is one thing seizing it with a detachment of the Marines is quite another.
Since when? Territorial waters stretch to the 12 mile marker (if memory serves).
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#46
Report 1 week ago
#46
(Original post by Harpoon)
It is currently cheaper to send a ship around Africa than go through the Suez
That was true in 2016, but then the Egyptians cut tanker rates by 45%. Is it still dearer?
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#47
Report 1 week ago
#47
(Original post by Napp)
(i have heard no mention of the ship running dark)
Since when? Territorial waters stretch to the 12 mile marker (if memory serves).
You should do a bit more research before posting then. The straits are only about eight miles wide.
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#48
Report 1 week ago
#48
Iran is now stating the only honourable thinG is to seize a UK tanker. Bet someones premiums have shot up. Wonder if there are any sailing up the straits?
Maybe we will get to see UK hostages on TV again.
Last edited by 999tigger; 1 week ago
0
reply
Harpoon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#49
Report 1 week ago
#49
As far as I know, yes.
(Original post by Good bloke)
That was true in 2016, but then the Egyptians cut tanker rates by 45%. Is it still dearer?
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#50
Report 1 week ago
#50
(Original post by 999tigger)
Maybe we will get to see UK hostages on TV again.
Or, perhaps, jollies on tankers in the gulf.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#51
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#51
(Original post by Good bloke)
That was true in 2016, but then the Egyptians cut tanker rates by 45%. Is it still dearer?
Wasn't that for very specific groupings? Not every ship.
For example;
https://worldmaritimenews.com/archiv...s-for-bulkers/

Nevermind the fact i assume ships would need insurance to be able to pass through there and its rather likely thats hard to come by for Iranian vessels.
(Original post by Good bloke)
You should do a bit more research before posting then. The straits are only about eight miles wide.
You should probably read a bit more carefully, I simply stated the law (which is 12 nmi) Either way I have never made claim to being any form of an expert on where ne nations sovereignty starts and ends in cases such as this.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#52
Report 1 week ago
#52
(Original post by Napp)
You should probably read a bit more carefully,
My comment about your research was directed at the fact that you didn't know the vessel had turned off its AIS transponder, not your ignorance of geography. It is impossible to move directly between the Atlantic and the Mediterranean without crossing EU waters.
0
reply
Harpoon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#53
Report 1 week ago
#53
Do you have a source to state its AIS was turned off?

If it was, then that's another major flag that the vessel is suspicious/avoiding detection and would also be dangerous, especially in a busy TSS
(Original post by Good bloke)
My comment about your research was directed at the fact that you didn't know the vessel had turned off its AIS transponder, not your ignorance of geography. It is impossible to move directly between the Atlantic and the Mediterranean without crossing EU waters.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#54
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#54
(Original post by Good bloke)
My comment about your research was directed at the fact that you didn't know the vessel had turned off its AIS transponder, not your ignorance of geography. It is impossible to move directly between the Atlantic and the Mediterranean without crossing EU waters.
I'm still curious as to where you got this information from... I have yet to see a report saying it was running dark? By all means provide a link though.
I'll take your word for it, i have never made claim to being a either an expert at geography nor the study of where countries delineate their maritime boundaries.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#55
Report 1 week ago
#55
(Original post by Napp)
it was apparently a helpful nudge from the US that set the thing in motion.
Ah yes. Apparently.
(Original post by Napp)
I'm still curious as to where you got this information from... I have yet to see a report saying it was running dark? By all means provide a link though.
Why's it ok for you to report on something that's alleged but not anybody else?
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#56
Report 1 week ago
#56
(Original post by Harpoon)
Do you have a source to state its AIS was turned off?

If it was, then that's another major flag that the vessel is suspicious/avoiding detection and would also be dangerous, especially in a busy TSS
Well, what prompted me to investigate was that there is no voyage information on the tracking site linked earlier in the thread, just the ship at anchor since being seized. That is a clue. Then CNN reports it as coming from Lloyds List.

In mid-April, the Grace 1 loaded up with Iranian oil and turned off its tracking signals to avoid detection before sailing around the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa to the Strait of Gibraltar, according to an article published in maritime publication Lloyds List earlier this week.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/04/u...gbr/index.html
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#57
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#57
(Original post by Drewski)
Ah yes. Apparently. That most telling of evidence from random internet nomarks who haven't got a ****ing clue what they're talking about.
Erm actually thats what the article said mate. Perhaps you should read it before getting all het up though?
Why's it ok for you to report on something that's alleged but not anybody else?
What are you talking about?
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#58
Report 1 week ago
#58
(Original post by Napp)
Erm actually thats what the article said mate. Perhaps you should read it before getting all het up though?

What are you talking about?
Which is a report based on hearsay and not corroborated.

And yet, when others say things that have come from a similar level of source, you have a pop. Why the hypocrisy?
0
reply
Harpoon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#59
Report 1 week ago
#59
That article also states they'd turn it on and off at random intervals.

I'd be very shocked if they didn't have AIS on approaching the STROG
(Original post by Good bloke)
Well, what prompted me to investigate was that there is no voyage information on the tracking site linked earlier in the thread, just the ship at anchor since being seized. That is a clue. Then CNN reports it as coming from Lloyds List.

In mid-April, the Grace 1 loaded up with Iranian oil and turned off its tracking signals to avoid detection before sailing around the Cape of Good Hope in southern Africa to the Strait of Gibraltar, according to an article published in maritime publication Lloyds List earlier this week.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/04/u...gbr/index.html
Last edited by Harpoon; 1 week ago
1
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#60
Report Thread starter 1 week ago
#60
(Original post by Drewski)
Which is a report based on hearsay and not corroborated.
Actually its a quote from the Spanish foreign minister. Again, you should probably read these articles before running your mouth off.
And yet, when others say things that have come from a similar level of source, you have a pop. Why the hypocrisy?
Yes heaven forbid I ask for a source :rolleyes:

Question though, why are you getting so frightfully upset with my comment? I mean its touching and all that but slightly strange.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice now or on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (122)
19.55%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (58)
9.29%
No I am happy with my course choice (352)
56.41%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (92)
14.74%

Watched Threads

View All