So....four tankers attacked....three you say we're Mines....and the odd one was a Hellfire Missile from a US Reaper Drone is it now?

Who and how were the three successful Mines attached?

Why a mix of Mines and a Drone or did a new and secret Drone attach the Mines?

Lay out for us how you think these four attacks were perpetrated would you?

I have never suggested it was a US Hellfire Missile, I reported what the Tanker crew and its owners have publicly stated regarding a missile rather than a mine hitting the ship.

As for the mines being attached, when, how and by whom were they attached ? Again the claim of mines is being done by media, a drone loaded with some explosives could just as easily been the culprit for all of them.

If it was a "Military" missile I very much doubt the ship would have been going anywhere but attaching some explosives to a drone is not exactly high tech anymore and that is going to be scary in the future.

Bearing in mind that the ships were underway then it requires a decent feat to be able to place mines in such a way as to minimise damage, that is unless they had been planted when ship was picking up its cargo.

Puzzled about reluctance of revealing surveillance around all the ships.

Long held Plans.....or long held plans?

The way our Administrations how can it be long held plans?

I am sure there is a contingency plan for war with the UK stashed away somewhere in a filing cabinet at DOD.....it will be a very thin File however.

Oh the plans are there for all, even I would suggest for taking back areas of the US that have decided to go their own way.

Administrations come and go but you can bet plans were drawn up with lots of different scenarios and get reviewed on a reasonably regular basis depending on political environment and with little administration involvement.

US has "interfered" in UK elections before both overtly and covertly, I fully expect them to do so again next election.

US wouldn't be doing its job in looking after its own interests were it not doing that.

Maybe we need to look beyond the obvious parties - who is most likely to benefit from a war in the Gulf, and the resultant squeeze on oil exports and increase in Oil prices? Maybe even non-State entities

We have agreed on stuff before. :)

Tanker belonging to company Zodiac Marine attacked off Masirah Island in Oman. Two crew dead including one Briton.

No news yet on the nature of the attack.

https://apnews.com/article/ship-isra...fafb31cc42fa50

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — An oil tanker linked to an Israeli billionaire reportedly came under attack off the coast of Oman in the Arabian Sea, authorities said Friday, an assault that killed two crew members.

The attack Thursday night targeted Liberian-flagged oil tanker Mercer Street just northeast of the Omani island of Masirah. The location is over 300 kilometers (185 miles) southeast of Oman’s capital, Muscat…..

London-based Zodiac Maritime, part of Israeli billionaire Eyal Ofer’s Zodiac Group, issued a statement saying the ship was the Liberian-flagged oil tanker Mercer Street and was Japanese owned. The British Defense Ministry earlier misidentified the ship’s owners.

Zodiac Maritime described the attack as “piracy,” without elaborating. It later said the attack killed two crew members, one from the United Kingdom and another from Romania. It said the company was “not aware of harm to any other personnel.”

“At the time of the incident the vessel was in the northern Indian Ocean, traveling from Dar es Salaam to Fujairah with no cargo onboard,” the statement from Zodiac Maritime said, naming ports in Tanzania and the United Arab Emirates respectively…..

An brief initial statement from the British military’s United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations said an investigation was underway into the incident, which it described as happening late Thursday night.

The statement did not elaborate, other to say that it suspected the attack did not involve piracy. Earlier on Thursday, the British military group had said it was investigating another unexplained incident in the same area, but it did not elaborate.

Oman did not acknowledge an attack and officials there did not respond to requests for comment. The U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, which patrols the Mideast, did not respond to a request for comment.

Masirah huh?
 

That’s pretty exciting.

BV

Not the usual pirate hunting ground off Salalah/ East Yemen. Not the usual 'pirates' either..

Indeed, especially if you have concerns about regional instability and Iranian-backed militia attacking merchant shipping that is supposed to have right of innocent passage. (Let's not get into piracy in the Indian Ocean and off HOA.) If you were looking for signals that the regime might be willing to have a pop at oil traffic through the Straits of Hormuz, this could be one. The absence of substantive comment from Oman, MOD, 5th Fleet suggests there may be a bit of analysis and planning going on, so there will be some excitement in several HQs today.

Anyone any idea what the attack was carried out by? It seems a bit away from the normal "danger"areas that I remember from my years in that part of the world (and there were quite a few!).

Bill

Reports are it was an armed suicide drone. Presumably it would have to have had either a line of sight command link or satellite.

The two reported killed were the captain, a Rumanian, and a British security guard. Which would seem to suggest it targeted the bridge.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle...st-2021-07-30/

….Al Alam TV, the Iranian government's Arabic-language television network, cited unnamed sources as saying the attack on the ship came in response to a suspected, unspecified Israeli attack on Dabaa airport in Syria…..

Israeli news website Ynet said the assessment in Israel was that there were two attacks on the ship, spaced several hours apart. The first caused no damage, and the second hit the bridge, causing the casualties.….

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), which provides maritime security information, said the attack was not piracy. The vessel was about 152 nautical miles (280 km) northeast of the Omani port of Duqm when it was attacked, it said.…

The Iranians attack , the Israelis attack - quite honestly it suits a lot of people on both sides to stoke trouble

I have no time for either side

The Iranians have been getting hammered for some time now in Iraq and Syria. Not to mention countless Cyber attacks on their facilities.

Whilst I have no time for them I’m not surprised that, if involved, it took them this long.

From the ‘Arab News’ site, https://www.arabnews.com/node/1903181/middle-east
Quote: the attack which, US officials say, saw several drones laden with explosives flown into the Mercer Street tanker, one of which hit the crew’s living quarters.

Is that like a kamikaze cruise missile?

As opposed to the sort that returns from whence it came…?!

A 'kamikaze drone' is a 'loitering munition' in US English apparently.

. So what’s a mine called? They can loiter for years!

Article on the BBC News website.
Tanker attack: Tensions rise as Iran and Israel trade accusations

Given all the proxies fighting in this area, I'm surprised the Chinese have not yet been blamed.
It does seem rather obvious that there is a desire to choke off the Iran/China oil trade, this 'incident' seems tailor made to make that politically passable.
I'd consequently expect China to start using Chinese flagged ships next, despite the economic hit, because they really need reliable supply.
I do not think Israel would want to get into China's bad books.

How do you get a mine into the crew’s quarters or the bridge?
https://japantoday.com/category/worl...-that-killed-2
Quote:

The drone attack blasted a hole through the top of the oil tanker’s bridge, where the captain and crew command the vessel, a U.S. official said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity as an investigation into the attack still was ongoing.

Things are escalating….

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...iracy-incident

Iranian-backed forces suspected of tanker hijacking off UAE coast

Iranian-backed forces are suspected of being behind the seizure of a tanker off the coast of the United Arab Emirates, after Britain’s maritime trade agency reported a “potential hijack” in the area on Tuesday by eight to nine armed individuals.

Maritime security sources identified the vessel as the Panama-flagged asphalt tanker that was reportedly intercepted in an area in the Arabian Sea leading to the strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil exports flow.

Maritime security analysts at Dryad Global and Aurora Intelligence later named the endangered ship as the Asphalt Princess travelling to Sohar, a port on Oman’s northern coast.In a statement, the UK Foreign Office said it was “urgently investigating an incident on a vessel off the UAE coast”. A spokesperson for the US state department said it was “too early to offer a judgment” on the incident.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards denied that the country’s forces or allies were involved, saying the incident was a pretext for “hostile action” against Tehran, Iranian state television said on its website.

“According to information from security sources, Iran’s armed forces and all branches of the Islamic Resistance in the Middle East have nothing to do with the incident in the Gulf of Oman,” the Guards said in a statement carried by the website.

The statement said the incident was an attempt by western countries and Israel “to prepare the public opinion of the international community for hostile action against the honourable nation of Iran.”…..

First intimations of an incident emerged on Tuesday afternoon when a warning notice was issued by the British military’s United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO),which notified ships that “an incident is currently under way” – later upgraded to a “potential hijacking”.

An Oman Royal Air Force Airbus C-295MPA, a maritime patrol aircraft, was flying over the area, according to data from Flightradar24.com.

The initial warning emerged amid contradictory claims in different local media that up to four ships had reported issues. Four oil tankers announced around the same time via their automatic identification system trackers that they were “not under command”, according to MarineTraffic.com.

It was not clear, however, of the significance of those alerts or even if they were related, with one of the ships later moving again.

The US military’s Middle East-based Fifth Fleet and the British defence ministry did not immediately return calls for comment. The Emirati government did not immediately acknowledge the incident.…..

Sorry to disappoint the PPRuNe warmongers (actually, I'm not at all):

For full story, see https://news.sky.com/story/potential...-over-12372173

Not sure the hijckers either leaving, or being driven off, ends the overall situation - or the possibility of relation. Ship was turned to head towards Iran before the incident was closed, by whatever means…..

I await with interest any reports which come out as to what happened last night in the Straits of Hormuz…

https://www.euronews.com/2021/08/04/...ish-navy-group

“Late on Tuesday, as the incident was underway, six oil tankers off the coast of Fujairah had announced around the same time via their Automatic Identification System trackers that they were “not under command,” according to MarineTraffic.com. That typically means a vessel has lost power and can no longer steer.”…..

It's not particularly rare for vessels to display N.U.C both visual and by A.I.S. when awaiting voyage orders or load/discharge dates. They shouldn't as technically they are not NUC. Perhaps that's the reason for some of them.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/crew-o...aging-engines/

Crew of tanker off UAE coast said to thwart Iran hijacking by sabotaging engines

The crew of a Panama-flagged asphalt tanker off the coast of Oman reportedly managed to thwart an attempt by Iranian gunmen to take control of their ship and divert it to the Islamic Republic.

Roughly half a dozen Iranian operatives stormed the Asphalt Princess, but the crew onboard quickly sprung to action and sabotaged the ship’s engines so that it could not move any further, UK officials told British daily The Times on Wednesday.

The gunmen fled the ship once US and Omani warships arrived at the scene, The Times said, adding that none of the crew were injured in the hijacking attempt…..

Good to see this has now been publicised so that the next set of hijackers will know to threaten, or worse, the crew to reverse their sabotage. :rolleyes:

Seems it would be pretty hard for Iran to deny any culpability if they had successfully diverted it to Iran...