UK at risk from sea-borne attack, says Commons Defence Ctee

[airborne_artist]

BBC NEWS | Politics | UK 'at risk of sea-borne attack' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8054491.stm)

Given the length of coastline, it's hardly going to be possible to police it just from the surface. Some kind of air component would be needed surely?

[Horror box]

A job for Dad's Army. Bring back the Home Guard - hurrah!! "Carry on Captain Mainwaring"

[HighTow]

Time to re-instate Operation Banquet?

[Tiger16]

Joking aside, a full LPG or LNG tanker is - in effect - a 50,000 Tonne Fuel Air Explosive bomb. Stand well back!

[CirrusF]

Some kind of air component would be needed surely?


There is already a motley collection of coastguard and contract aircraft which carry out sporadic surveillance - but only rather half-heartedly. As the article suggests, there needs to be a centralised structure to coordinate the various assets.

The Italians recently identified a similar issue - they too have a long coastline to patrol and the job currently shared between navy, guardia di finanza, and coastguard, with lots of different aircraft. They've started a process to bring the assets under a central coordination centre. They're also looking at DA42 MPP with look-down radar as a cheap solution with long range and endurance.

[cliffnemo]

German battleships shelled Scarboro during W.W 1 , and some towns further up the N.E coast. The recruiting offices had long queues outside the following day.

[Roadster280]

Ah yes, a potential 50kT detonation in Milford Haven.

Any other improvements on the horizon?

[Double Zero]

If I'm not mistaken we currently use Nimrods and 'other' aircraft & platforms, a true case of combined forces ?

I can say from experience, approaching the Southern English coast at night in my little - one might think stealthy - sailing boat with no lights on ( the battery was u/s ) we soon got hovered over by an equally unlit Lynx.

I'm always surprised when yachties with tall masts - stand by for the ooh er, missus comments - are asked to buy ever more expensive radar reflectors, while in WWII a U-Boat's periscope was recognisable ; and radar is of course not the only sensor available.

[airborne_artist]

As the article suggests, there needs to be a centralised structure to coordinate the various assets.


And do the rest of the C3I, too. No good having the assets if they don't know what to look out for, and if their reports just get dumped on a guy/gal who can't assess them.

[GeeRam]

As the article suggests, there needs to be a centralised structure to coordinate the various assets.

RAF Coastal Command perhaps :)

[Pontius Navigator]

Interesting. I attended a security briefing two weeks back. Quite boring until they started passing out IEDs. However their view, it was at a local sea port, was that the maritime threat to the UK was next to non-existent. They rejected the idea that a ship might be hijacked, equipped as a bomb, and then driven into a port.

They also suggested that Arabs would get sea sick and be unable to sail a ship from the Indian Ocean. I, and a number of port maritime officials were greatly reassured by the brief.

[Melchett01]

The Commons defence committee suggests developing a "deterrent capability" to ward off sea-borne attacks.

Ermmmm, I think that might just be called the Royal Navy. Or am I looking at this overly simplisticly? :ugh:

[Double Zero]

Melchett,

I suspect that while RAF Coastal Command do well, it would have been handy if we still had a Navy & Fleet Air Arm.

Touching wood it's notable that the FAA traditionally get shafted just before a major war !

We do have more assets than publicised, mostly airborne, as every other country does.

As to turning merchant ships into very nasty big-time bombs, with something beginning with 'N' wheeled up the Thames, I understand there are sensors available to stop that, and you can bet the meeting place of politicians will have the best protection.

Whether we have the means, ship, sub' or air / spaceborne, to take it out is another matter.

Regards from a minor one of the team on the first Sea Eagle firing !

[Navy_Adversary]

Someones been reading Duncan Falconers book, 'Hijack':eek:

[racedo]

They also suggested that Arabs would get sea sick and be unable to sail a ship from the Indian Ocean.

Yankees had that idea on 10/9/01.

No way we could get attacked by planes as we have Radar where as the Hijackers flew in first class and after visiting Mickey Rat they did the deed.

Presuming that LNG terminal is already been given adequate attention about and below sea.

[doubledolphins]

Speaking from recent bitter experience I find it terribly sad that our once proud naval reserve is now nothing more than a suport organisation for the Royal Marines when deployed overseas. I know at least one senior officer who is trying to get a maritime element back into the Maritime Reserves but I fear the case is lost. This is a crying shame because coastal forces and seaward defence would be an ideal activity for the RNR. As it once was in the past for our predicessors. The Sea Fencibles, The RNAV and the RNVR. (Not to forget the RNXS, bless them!)

[Biggus]

While many airborne assets are in theory available to police our "shores", that is not the same as saying they conduct regular patrols.

I would suspect that cost is a major factor in whatever actually takes place....

[GPMG]

The joke used to be:

Q: Are you in the Army?
A: No I'm a Royal Marine.
Q: Ahh so your in the Navy then??
A: No, they are merely our Taxi service.

What a crying shame that an element of truth is creeping into that comment.


Gone are the days when the RN could handle any kind of sea battle, however I would doubt that any nation would rest if they knew that a few RN hunter killers were lurking around.

[NURSE]

Not only the danger of terrorists blowing up a tanker but the UK coastline is ideal for smuggling as well not only terrorists items like weapons and explosives but crime related smuggling is also a threat to our society like Drugs and people.
I do sometime wonder if a proper paramilitary border protection service would be a better option than the myriad of different services providing the current patchy service.

[doubledolphins]

GPMG, thanks for your sentiments. You are so right about our SSNs. First the Argies knew about it was Belgrano sinking. Result, 25 de Mayo runs for home and never comes out to play again. Problem is they are not realy coastal boats. We need SSKs (or a couple of German SSCs), that's Diesels to you chaps.

Nurse, you may be suprised to know that at one time a secondary war role for officers such as my self was to be a Customs Officer.

[NURSE]

Nurse, you may be suprised to know that at one time a secondary war role for officers such as my self was to be a Customs Officer.

nope not suprised in the slightest......though doesn't surfacing to do a board and search make you very vulnerable? ;)

[Tonka Toy]

Heres a thought,

There are three fixed wing CG assetts employed solely on single taskings. They are not multi role.
They are all different aircraft.

If we standardise to one aircraft, -the F406- equip as per greek marpol F406 with a dinghy drop capability we solve maritime pollution control, SAR/SAL and surveillance all in one go. Beech King Air would do just as well.

Why don't we do that before some dissaffected individuals drive an LPG carrier up the thames and blow it up, -during the olympics?

Well you'll have to ask the CEO of the MCA whose more interested in trying to merge CG aircraft into fisheries aircraft and 'save money' rather than considr the security and integrity of this nation.

[andyy]

Sadly the RN declined to take on the constabulary function a long time ago. Presumably ASW & Carriers (even Invincible Class ones) are sexier. Shades of the Convoy escort Vs Battleship debate of WW1 & 2.

No one is considering the consolidated maritime picture around the UK & responsibility is split between Customs, Police, Coastguard etc etc. Its a shambles. And to anyone who thinks that a terrorist won't try to hit a ship with a RIB full of explsives I would point out that the USS Stark was victim to such an attack a few years ago. I doubt that many people really thought that terrorists would fly 3 airliners into major US landmarks either but they did. TBH I'm surprised that a maritime attack of a tanker or ferry hasn't happened already.

[Biggus]

Not deliberately being pedantic, but it was the USS Cole that was attacked by a boat loaded with explosives...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing

The USS Stark was hit by Exocets in 1987!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_(FFG-31)

[andyy]

Biggus. Yes, sorry. Made the mistake of writing from (fading) memory & got the two incidents round the wrong way.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

andyy. I think you will find that "the RN declined to take on the constabulary function" because no funding was to be provided for it. It would indeed have taken funds away from core tasks. If I remember rightly, funds for Aid to the Civil Power were removed many years ago. This is not to be confused with the wider Military Aid to the Civil Authority.

[Wader2]

There is much uninformed theories about the risk from an LPG or LNG tanker being blown up. The link below, and the extract, tell a different story. A friend of mine was on the golf course at Aberdeen when he was called to deal with the Rosandra at Brindisi.

April 1990 . Val Rosandra
The vessel, a 2999 m3 semi . pressurised LPG carrier with cylindrical tanks was discharging propylene at Brindisi when a fire started between the compressor house and No.3 tank. The vessel was towed out to sea with No.3 tank dome burning. This continued to burn for a further 22 days after which explosive charges were laid to breach the domesof the four remaining tanks and allow the gas to burn off. This situation continued for a further 16 days until the vessel was scuttled.

As the gas vapourised it would torch in the atmosphere, consume the local oxygen, and extinguish. More gas would vaporised from the heat and the process continued.

http://www.sjofartsverket.se/upload/4001/77-INF2.pdf

[dead_pan]

This does beg the question "by whom?". I struggle to think of any nation which has a beef with the UK and a sufficiently capable naval fleet to be able to mount a seaborne attack. As for a terrorist attack, well, we could have a fleet the size of the yanks and you could still wouldn't be able to protect all of our coast all of the time. Sounds to me this is the kind of 'issue' posed by a group of MPs with a bit too much time on their hands.

Also, why hasn't anyone mentioned the 4th emergency service (no, not the AA) the Coastguard? They've got air & sea assets which could be armed in extremis. I'm sure you could dangle an Exocet or two off their shiny new AW139s.

[andyy]

GBZ, you may be right about the funding issue, I am not sure, but that seems to be just typical of the politicians - define a requirement and then not fund it. True of all aspects of defence at the minute. Still, the Coastguard, various Police Forces, Fisheries Protection and Customs have funding, so surely that funding should have been transferred to the RN/ RAF for the maritime constabulary tasks.

[Hilife]

Let’s hope they don’t choose Bexhill beach for their landing. Sightings of a few Mersey Goldfish close to the gunwales should deter any self respecting terrorist from storming the beach. :ooh:

[Double Zero]

Until a few years ago, the UK Coastguard had manned lookouts, little more than huts, dotted around the coastline keeping a visual lookout, for people in trouble or smugglers.

These were abandoned as a cost cutting measure in favour of a few shiny co-ordinating stations, with all the whistles & bells.

This of course means that to get into trouble one must first have at least a VHF radio.

Re-manning these lookouts with auxillary staff, day & night with NVG's etc, would not only save lives ( both at sea and at cliffs etc ) but would be a very handy layer of defence, for relative peanuts.

I always thought that on the life-saving issue alone the decision to bin the lookouts was criminal, now we have drug smugglers & terrorists doubly so.

[chopper2004]

dead pan

The AW139 has not been cleared for guided weapons let alone tested with any. I doubt an Exocet could fit on. Only helis I have seen with Exocet has been Qatar Sea King, Aeronavale Super Frelon and AS-332L/532 . In terms of armament I have seen on an AW139 has been the GPMG yes as in variants for the Irish Air Corps. The proposed complete military version the AW149, has not been developed yet (barring saw mock up in Paris Airshow 2001 :ok:)

[andyy]

Dead Pan. Also remember, its not just about having assests, you need to have a consolidated picture of what is going on; a way of fusing intelligence and co-ordinating activity. Thats a big committment, but its one that the military are used to delivering. The issue, as mentioned earlier, is how its funded & resourced.

[BobHead]

It would appear that the Security Committee for the Olympics has been told, Times report 24th May 2009 In the Thames Estuary the RN will moor a Type 45 Destroyer.

"Super-destroyer to guard 2012 Games. The navy is set to deploy its most advanced weapons against any 9/11-style attack"

It was later released and printed in the Times

"A military official said two Tornado GR4 fighter aircraft were on permanent standby at RAF Marham near King’s Lynn in Norfolk to launch at 15 minutes’ notice."

I have posed these two thoughts, not with standing the problems of taking a flying bomb down over Central London, no serious answer has yet come to the surface.


1. There is no doubt that the Type 45's missiles, Aster 30, has the range and ability to shoot down the a/c in question, but does the Combat Control System fitted have the ability to track and identify a small or medium size a/c over a built up area, with the aircraft possibly flying below the level of the many high rise buildings found in that area of Greater London and to also sort out friend from foe. As it was found in the Falklands radar designed to efficiently identify and track targets over water was found to be wanting when the a/c were over land and flying low.

Remember also the Met Pol Helicopter Base is in Epping Forest at Lippets Hill and just about all their flights will transit over the Olympic site, thats before civil flights into City and LHR plus VIP and military helo's are added to the mix. Which Warfare Officer is going to take out Sir Alan Sugar as he is filming another series of "the Apprentice.

Is Samson etc up to the task?

The the RAF contrinution to this defence project.

So if we assume that the target a/c is a jet at 400 mph and approaches from any direction than Norfolk where he has been told a RAF FJ is on standby.The RAF take 15 minutes to get into the air and 8 minutes to cover the ground to Hackney our target has moved on 150 miles approx from time to scramble given.

So the plan is we fly a smallish jet at 400 mph from Southampton area as low as possible using Gatwick as its turning point.

Not so hard if we can keep it a secret we will be downed before the RAF do it for us.


BobH

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

andyy. The funding aspect is central to this. For ad hoc MACA and MACP, JSP368 is applicable, particularly Ch 4, Annex 4.6, starting at Para 5. It becomes complicated, though, if the task requires additional material assets and/or manpower. The proposed coastal defence task would, indeed, require additional assets and the funds would be needed “up front”.

http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/607E213E-10AC-4B8C-8DCC-953FDFDA5461/0/jsp368_mod_guide_to_repayment.pdf

[airborne_artist]

So the plan is we fly a smallish jet at 400 mph from Southampton area as low as possible using Gatwick as its turning point. Why bother - just hi-jack a 40' artic from Tesco and fill it with "stuff". Fake ID, take the Tesco driver's overalls, and you are in.

We did lots of these type of scenarios in the late 70s and early 80s in a certain green outfit. Rarely did we fail to get onto the target with enough "stuff" to knock out an essential component, and we'd only done the most cursory of recces. Google Earth, some good quality camera-work and plenty of ground recce and unless you have the Brigade of Guards standing shoulder to shoulder all round the target you'll still get in. Even then a few flexwing microlights would do the job, especially at night.

[andyy]

GBZ, fully understood!

[BobHead]

A-A

I have no doubt you did and my comments were made tounge in cheek as our Pollies, Civil Serpents and * Officers seem to talk the talk when they cannot walk the walk. :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh: Why not just say its impossible.

BobH:

[chopper2004]

Referring to 2012, hope they'll consider AD assets such asTyphoon Tranche 3 on QRA, as what the Italians did during the winter olympics, where there was all the rotary and fixxed wing assets of the Guardia di Finanza, carabinieri, Polizia de Stato, plus think Sentry from Waddington (?),AMI, Marina and Esercito including first CAP for the Eurofighter.:ok: Oh and don't forget an orbiting satellite dedicated to surveillance.


Thats a point why the GR4? I suppose with the self defence AIM-9L or if they be equipped with ASRAAM, then some limited CAP capability.

[airborne_artist]

Why not just say its impossible.

That would involve telling the truth, which doesn't come easily to most politicians, some civil servants, and maybe even a senior officer who is worrying about their next promotion.

[Double Zero]

Will the Type 45 even have missiles by then ? And a very good point that if it uses them it achieves pretty much the same as a suicidal airliner, or may even increase the effect of a smaller aircraft, so exactly what is the point ?

The cynical side of me can't help thinking the Thames has become the place of choice for cocktail parties for ' big do's '...if it was anchored somewhere further out it might be useful, but that would be inconvenient.

[Tonka Toy]

DP you just shot a big pointless hole in your budget by buying 139's. I refer back to the 406 / beech king air point.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

The ongoing drama regarding the MV Arctic Sea seems like a reasonable reason for looking at this thread again. The issues discussed here were mentioned before on PPRune (here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=111156) for instance) as well on other sites - like here (http://www.arrse.co.uk/Forums/viewtopic/t=123345/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=0.html) on ARRSE.

I also wondered if that report has anything to do with the olympics, or the proposed changes to naval bases (moving the bulk of the fleet to the smaller and less secure of the South coast bases). A few responses to earlier comments...

Firstly by Pontious Navigator:

Interesting. I attended a security briefing two weeks back. Quite boring until they started passing out IEDs. However their view, it was at a local sea port, was that the maritime threat to the UK was next to non-existent. They rejected the idea that a ship might be hijacked, equipped as a bomb, and then driven into a port.

Next to non existant doesn't mean non existent.

They also suggested that Arabs would get sea sick and be unable to sail a ship from the Indian Ocean. I, and a number of port maritime officials were greatly reassured by the brief.

What about merchant seamen from Arab nations? Do they get so sea sick they can't function?

doubledolphins:

Speaking from recent bitter experience I find it terribly sad that our once proud naval reserve is now nothing more than a suport organisation for the Royal Marines when deployed overseas. I know at least one senior officer who is trying to get a maritime element back into the Maritime Reserves but I fear the case is lost.

Yes there's nothing less maritime than deploying aboard a ship to defend her from (mainly) waterborne threats, in support of current operations. :hmm:

This is a crying shame because coastal forces and seaward defence would be an ideal activity for the RNR. As it once was in the past for our predicessors. The Sea Fencibles, The RNAV and the RNVR. (Not to forget the RNXS, bless them!)

Perhaps, but we're meant to be one Navy now...

Nurse:

Not only the danger of terrorists blowing up a tanker but the UK coastline is ideal for smuggling as well not only terrorists items like weapons and explosives but crime related smuggling is also a threat to our society like Drugs and people.
I do sometime wonder if a proper paramilitary border protection service would be a better option than the myriad of different services providing the current patchy service.

I think the police are in charge up to the 12nm limit, I'll mention this more later.

andyy:

Sadly the RN declined to take on the constabulary function a long time ago. Presumably ASW & Carriers (even Invincible Class ones) are sexier. Shades of the Convoy escort Vs Battleship debate of WW1 & 2.

The RN's job is to operate worldwide, not just within home waters. That takes it into places where there is a real threat.

No one is considering the consolidated maritime picture around the UK & responsibility is split between Customs, Police, Coastguard etc etc. Its a shambles. And to anyone who thinks that a terrorist won't try to hit a ship with a RIB full of explsives I would point out that the USS Stark was victim to such an attack a few years ago. I doubt that many people really thought that terrorists would fly 3 airliners into major US landmarks either but they did. TBH I'm surprised that a maritime attack of a tanker or ferry hasn't happened already.

I believe you were referring to the attack against the USS Cole. This, like the attack against the French oil tanker Limburg took place in the Middle East. Terrorists will find it hard to launch small boat attacks from the shores of a Western nation without giving the game away.

dead pan:

Also, why hasn't anyone mentioned the 4th emergency service (no, not the AA) the Coastguard? They've got air & sea assets which could be armed in extremis. I'm sure you could dangle an Exocet or two off their shiny new AW139s.

Aren't the Coastguard mostly a rescue/safety organisation? Does this threat really demand anti ship missiles.

andyy:

GBZ, you may be right about the funding issue, I am not sure, but that seems to be just typical of the politicians - define a requirement and then not fund it. True of all aspects of defence at the minute. Still, the Coastguard, various Police Forces, Fisheries Protection and Customs have funding, so surely that funding should have been transferred to the RN/ RAF for the maritime constabulary tasks.

Can (or should) the RN/RAF perform the law enforcement tasks of the Police and Customs, and the rescue roles of the Coastguard?

My own views....

1. The threat that terrorists pose is real. However, I think it is safe to say that the threat of maritime terrorism is far more of an issue for deployed forces than in UK waters. Terrorists need opportunity, capability and intent. terrorist cell attempting to acquire a boast, reece targets, and build a bomb would attract the attention of the police and intelligence services.

2. The doomsday scenario discussed by some, where terrorists seize and large vessel and either use the vessel as a weapon platform or as a weapon can only be dealt with by the intelligence services and the big boys, in other words well away from the UK. A fast boat with a GPMG won't do any good, these sort of threats would demand frigates, submarines, Nimrods and Special Forces.

3. Increasing the number of patrol vessels would help, but you still would have the problem of being in the right place at the right time. The UK has something like 10 000 miles of coast. There's another issue - the law. The RN Fishery Protection Squadron are legally authorised to conduct boardings on Fishing Vessels within the UK EEZ. Can they board or investigate other nefarious activity outside of the 12nm limit, ie, in international waters? Can they do this within the 12nm limit, or does Police primacy mean the local Police force is in charge?

4. The UK police force with the largest number of launches, RIBs etc is of course the MOD Police, who escort warships and RFAs in and out or harbour, and perform patrols (sometimes assisting other police forces). Does this role need to be extended for all major ports? Do they need to be armed? Should every major port have a version of the Gibraltar Squadron (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/surface-fleet/patrol-vessels/gibraltar-squadron/)? How would that work with Police primacy?

5. A few armed helicopters (RN Lynx with 0.50 Cal HMG perhaps) located near major ports might be a better solution (can move faster and no issues with Police primacy), and could do a SAR role when dedicated SAR helicopters become a rarity in the next decade. But where would we get the extra aircraft and personnel from?

6. The main issue, in my view, is that there is no single agency in charge of maintaining the integrity and security of UK waters. Everyone follows at their bit of the jigsaw, but nobody keeps an eye on the whole puzzle....

[Yeoman_dai]

You raise an interesting point wth regards to the Police/Military link. From my experience (so far) as a soldier, when on exercises designed to help train us for the 'aid to the civil power' role that the TA undertakes, the Police neither understand the rank and force structure, or our capabilities, and any such exercise generally degenerates into a bit of a mess.

For us to have any great influence over out coastal regions, the Police and Military need to have far greater intergration and understanding between the services - either that or the Police accept that their jurisdiction ends as soon as the land stops, and that anything futher is the responsibility of the Navy, or some other organisation - MOD police perhaps as you suggest.

[GeeRam]

We need a new Dog Boat fleet :)

[WE Branch Fanatic]

This article (http://www.janes.com/news/lawenforcement/pr/pr090625_1_n.shtml) suggests that not all our convinced current Police structures are suitable for dealing with terrorism.

The UK's current police structures for tackling terrorism have evolved from an outdated arrangement and are not appropriate to deal with the escalating threat from international terrorism. The excellent results being recorded in recent terrorism trials have been achieved in spite of the structural and operational confines.

It is inconceivable that if we were able to construct, on a blank piece of paper, an appropriate structure to deal with the threat of Al Qaeda, the current arrangement of collaboration between 43 forces would be the answer. Actually, our inability to break away from our current structure is probably playing more into the hands of terrorist groups than helping law enforcement thwart an attack.

Yeoman_dai

The trouble is waters up to the 12nm limit count as part of the UK, and the local Police force is the primary law enforcement agency. This is really the point here, nobody is in overall charge of maintaining security of the UK coast as a whole.

Most Police forces do their best. Devon and Cornwall Police are asking people to report suspicious waterborne activity (http://neighbourhoodpolicing.devon-cornwall.police.uk/BCU-1558/Sector-1564/NB-1567/Pages/BoatWatch1.aspx). All sorts of RIBs, launches and converted lifeboats are used by Police forces but they have an obvious problem, that is, they are unarmed. They could carry firearms teams but what if the threat demands platform mounted weapons such as the GPMG? I am unaware of any GPMGs, Miniguns or cannon in UK Police use (with the exception of the Civil Nuclear Constabulary who operate 30mm cannon aboard the ships used for transporting Plutonium), therefore it will come down to the RN and other services "aiding the civil power".

[WE Branch Fanatic]

From The Independent: National Maritime Information Centre will monitor threat from sea (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/national-maritime-information-centre-will-monitor-threat-from-sea-1925293.html)

[wokkamate]

errrrmmmm

Don't we have the SBS to do exactly what they say on the tin? Way I see it is the only snag is the MR2 going out of service and the MRA4 not coming into service! Or have I got it all wrong.......

Bring back the RAF Marine Branch with some fast patrol boats and guns and stuff!

Or maybe not. :ok:

[163627]

As already stated above the MoD police would be a very good starting point; they are all armed, staffed by very well trained mariners (many ex RN or RM) and have a great new fleet coming on stream:
Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | MOD Police unveil new state-of-the-art patrol boat (http://www.mod.uk/defenceinternet/defencenews/equipmentandlogistics/modpoliceunveilnewstateoftheartpatrolboat.htm)

Unfortunately, at present they only cover three small areas of the UK's coast and (as with everything else these days) who will pay?

[airborne_artist]

Don't we have the SBS to do exactly what they say on the tin?Divide the number of miles of UK coastline by a third of the SBS nominal roll (to give them a chance to sleep, but not take leave, weekends etc.).

What number do you get?








It's about 280. So each rufty-tufty canoeing Royal will have to patrol 280 miles of coast. Simples!

[ORAC]

The Halifax Explosion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion)

The Halifax Explosion occurred on Thursday, December 6, 1917, when the city of Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, was devastated by the huge detonation of the SS Mont-Blanc, a French cargo ship, fully loaded with wartime explosives, which accidentally collided with the Norwegian SS Imo in "The Narrows" section of the Halifax Harbour. About 2,000 people were killed by debris, fires, or collapsed buildings and it is estimated that over 9,000 people were injured. This is still the world's largest man-made accidental explosion.

At 8:40 in the morning, the SS Mont-Blanc, chartered by the French government to carry munitions to Europe, collided with the unloaded Norwegian ship Imo, chartered by the Commission for Relief in Belgium to carry relief supplies. Mont-Blanc caught fire ten minutes after the collision and exploded about twenty-five minutes later (at 9:04:35 AM). All buildings and structures covering nearly 2 square kilometres (500 acres) along the adjacent shore were obliterated, including those in the neighbouring communities of Richmond and Dartmouth. The explosion caused a tsunami in the harbour and a pressure wave of air that snapped trees, bent iron rails, demolished buildings, grounded vessels, and carried fragments of the Mont-Blanc for kilometres...........