![]() |
Media (Times Radio) carried an interview with an 'expert' - retired RN officer I think - who said they were visible on AIS. Just in and out.
He stated they were not minesweeping and could not fulfil that role as they were far too noisy. Mostly 'showing the flag' one thinks. |
Originally Posted by TWT
(Post 12068675)
One of them had its AIS txponder on and was seen inside the SoH on the Marine Traffic site. Have a look at
the latest video from Sal Mercogliano. If you want more proof ask the Omanis, Iranians or USN for a video. |
Originally Posted by ATNotts_2
(Post 12068686)
So US ships, or at least one ship has passed through the (singular) Strait. Whether that was "willy waving" or mine clearing we cannot verify.
|
This is a screenshot taken a few moments ago from Marine Traffic
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....a977cdab7b.png AIS delay which has been commonplace for all ships in the region, caused by either AIS land station damage or shut down or actions taken on the ship's bridge to turn the system off to evade detection (which is illegal to do but understandable in the case of the Strait of Hormuz where there is conflict). The majority of the other ships on the move are recording their AIS signatures around 20 to 50 minutes delay, so maybe the proximity of the USN is having an effect on transits...also those ships are no longer using their nationality or the nationality of crew / owner as destination. They mostly indicating actual destinations for the time being. |
Unfortunately it isn't Iran's oil once its left port. I wonder how will China respond?
|
"What are the chances of having ships going 'closer' to the Oman shoreline - out of range of any Iranian (north shore), based missile bases?" That's not possible - the Iranians have a wide range of missiles and drones which can reach the other shore - and a lot further |
The fact that one of the Arleigh Burke class vessels was in the Strait with its AIS on was clearly intentional. Political message?
The USN has a number of LCS ships reported to be in the Gulf and which have - again reportedly - worked up with A10s. A possible - of likely - scenario is that the LCS vessels conducted a mine clearance or confirmation,/checking operation with the Arleigh Burke providing additional cover. No doubt air assets would also have been involved. As to the results, well, who knows? |
Since this thread has just ended up as JB fodder..
I doubt anyone had much hope of an agreement, there were just too many non-negotiables on each side. The US administration couldn't negotiate a drink at an open bar, what they consider negotiation is bullying a much weaker party, from an absolute position of power, into an agreement they don't want. The moment they lack the leverage, ala Putin etc, they get nowhere. The Iranians are way more resilient than the administration gives them credit for, and have leverage of their own, not just the strait, but they are well aware the US do not want boots on the ground and that guarantees failure and makes the US look weak and desperate for a conclusion. The closer the midterms become the more leverage Iran will have. The tone of the "truths" just reflect poorly on the US president, they have really come up short on the global social media war. Maybe, both parties go back home and can find better compromise through backchannels, but until then it's status quo and no doubt the US will try deflect by blaming NATO and all their allies they have managed to alienate and offend from the very start. The Chinese are unlikely to take kindly to a blockade and they do have leverage of their own. The best thing the US could do is declare victory, again, and go home with their tail between their legs and try this again some other time when there is some competent leadership that is capable of proper planning, or diplomacy. |
Pakistan has deployed a huge military contingent comprising 13,000 soldiers and 12-18 fighter jets in Saudi Arabia. Pakistan is likely to deploy at least 50,000 soldiers in Saudi Arabia, along with more fighter jets, sources say. This deployment in Saudi Arabia is a part of strategic defence agreement that both countries signed last year. This deployment has come amid the escalating tensions in Middle East as the US-Iran talks fail in Islamabad. Saudi Arabia’s MoD confirmed April 11: Pakistani military contingent of ~13,000 troops and 10-18 fighter jets arrived at King Abdulaziz Air Base, Eastern Province — under the Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement signed September 2025. Reuters confirmed deployment triggered by Iranian strikes on Saudi energy infrastructure. The 50,000 projection is unconfirmed by wire. Pakistan sends military force, fighter jets to Saudi Arabia Pakistan has sent a military force and fighter jets to Saudi Arabia to boost security under a joint defence cooperation agreement between the two countries, the Saudi defence ministry said on Saturday. The Saudi ministry, in a statement, wrote that a military force and fighter jets from Pakistan had arrived at the King Abdulaziz Air Base in its eastern province. It added that the Pakistani deployment was aimed at “strengthening the joint defence cooperation agreement signed between the two brotherly countries”. “The Pakistani force consists of fighter and support aircraft belonging to the Pakistani Air Force, with the aim of enhancing joint military coordination, raising the level of operational readiness between the armed forces of the two countries,” it continued. The planes were sent after Iranian strikes hit key energy infrastructure and killed a Saudi national, three sources, including a senior Pakistani government official, told Reuters.They were “not there to attack anyone”, said the Pakistani official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. An Iranian strike on Saudi Arabia’s sprawling Jubail petrochemicals complex on Monday had raised concerns in Pakistan that the kingdom might retaliate, potentially jeopardising the Iran peace talks, the three sources said. The Pakistani deployment was aimed at reassuring Riyadh that Islamabad would help defend the kingdom from any further attacks, the sources said. The Saudi government media office and Pakistan’s military did not respond to requests for comment. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have long shared a multifaceted relationship rooted in strategic military cooperation, mutual economic interests, and shared Islamic heritage. These ties have encompassed economic assistance and energy supplies, with Riyadh being a significant source of financial aid and oil for Islamabad. In September of last year, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman signed a “Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement” in Riyadh, pledging that any attack on either nation would be treated as an act of aggression against both. |
I wonder if the Pakistani deployment reflects Sunni outrage at being attacked by a predominantly Shia nation? Interesting if Indonesia gets involved.
|
USAF E-11A BACN fleet (7); last reported locations 2026-04-11Z Prince Sultan Air Base (7!) ➢ N770AG (11-9355 #ae4de1) #AA690E (51d) ➢ 21-9045 #ae7466 (41d) ➢ 22-9046 #ae77a3 (39d) ➢ 22-9047 #ae77a4 (19d) ➢ 12-9506 #ae54b4 (15d) ➢ 23-9048 #ae77a5 (14d) ➢ N898M (24-9049 #af83f0) #AC641F (1d) ➢ We do not know how many E-11A BACN have been damaged or destroyed by Iran, but considering they sent their last one to KSA, I'd think at least one. 100% of the E-11 BACN fleet is deployed to KSA. :ooh::ooh::ooh: |
Originally Posted by BonnieLass
(Post 12068688)
AIS delay which has been commonplace for all ships in the region, caused by either AIS land station damage or shut down or actions taken on the ship's bridge to turn the system off to evade detection (which is illegal to do but understandable in the case of the Strait of Hormuz where there is conflict).
https://assets.publishing.service.go...2eb79/1795.pdf Operation of AIS 10. The changes to Chapter V of SOLAS introduce a new requirement to maintain AIS in operation at all times, although the requirement is largely a reinforcement of the existing requirements to automatically provide and receive AIS information. The requirement is bound by the exception of “where international agreements, rules or standards provide for the protection of navigational information.” These agreements, rules or standards refer to the IMO Guidelines for the Onboard Operational Use of Shipborne Automatic Identification Systems (Resolution A.917(22)). Paragraph 21 of these guidelines was modified by the 23 rd Assembly in December 2003 to introduce concepts for security incidents and mandatory reporting systems. The complete text of paragraph 21 is now: - 3 - “AIS should always be in operation when ships are underway or at anchor. If the master believes that the continual operation of AIS might compromise the safety or security of his / her ship or where security incidents are imminent, the AIS may be switched off. Unless it would further comprise the safety or security, if the ship is operating in a mandatory reporting system, the master should report this action and the reason for doing so to the competent authority. Actions of this nature should always be recorded in the ship’s logbook together with the reason for doing so. The master should however restart the AIS as soon as the source of danger has disappeared. If the AIS unit is shut-down, static data and voyage related information remains stored. Restart is done by switching on the power to the AIS unit. Ship’s own data will be transmitted after a two minute initialisation period. In ports AIS operation should be in accordance with port requirements.” |
Trump has said the US Navy is going to start "blockading any and all ships" trying to enter or leave the Strait of Hormuz...he also says "instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran",
That should help Mr Putin even more..... |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 12068851)
Trump has said the US Navy is going to start "blockading any and all ships" trying to enter or leave the Strait of Hormuz.
That should help Mr Putin even more..... |
Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo
(Post 12068851)
Trump has said the US Navy is going to start "blockading any and all ships" trying to enter or leave the Strait of Hormuz...he also says "instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran",
That should help Mr Putin even more..... |
ORAC
In the last decade have seen 001 on my rounds here at Mildenhall, first time Labor Day September 2018 and its a regular one around European theater. Then had the pleasure of standing next to 001 and chatting to the crew at Dubai Air Show 2021 so my photos below from 2018 and 2021. https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....031ffaea3b.jpg https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....c831959b48.jpg https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....652df2a219.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....898f69ca74.jpg Also 2 years ago saw 9355 on approach to the 'Hall in August. so my photos below https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....668f632eea.jpg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....61d9546eaa.jpg It took over the role from the NASA WB-57F which cough devoid of NASA markings were operating in the very role temporarily in Afghanistan of airborne battlefield comms relay. I did see one Wb-57F devoid of markings arriving in November 2013 at the 'Hall so my photos below https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....23cb3bec8c.jpg https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....8ab3568db1.jpg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0d1dd94665.jpg cheers |
Audio/Video
IRGC Navy published a radio communication they had with USS Frank E. Petersen Jr. (DDG-121) while passing the strait of Hormuz yesterday Apr 11, 2026. |
A KC-135R of the Ohio Air National Guard, which was damaged as a result of a ballistic missile strike by the IRGC Aerospace Force at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, arrived at RAF Mildenhall today, en route to the United States for final repairs. You can see multiple patches on its fuselage caused by shrapnel from the ballistic missiles that struck the tankers parked next to it. That day, the U.S. Air Force lost a pair of KC-135Rs, one KC-46A, and one E-3G at Prince Sultan Air Base. Additionally, two EC-130H Compass Call aircraft, another E-3G Sentry, and at least seven KC-135R/T tankers were damaged. https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....75c0d7b8ea.png Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker 1x #AE0361 59-1444 - REACH 717 11:44 - REACH 717 inbound RAF Mildenhall from Chania Note this is the KC-135 which declared a Mayday a couple of days ago whilst crossing the Med on the way to Mildenhall and diverted. Obviously needed a bit more patching up. |
|
White Specks in some very odd places don't you think ORAC ? |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 12068893)
Video taxying in.
|
How about the pressure vessel? They did the entire route back to UK with this? Is this real? Okay a ferry flight of an aircraft damaged on the ground before and now brought to the UK. It had looked like new combat damage on a return from hot zones first. |
Originally Posted by Wyntor
(Post 12068859)
Surely, inderdicting neutral vessels, not previously sanctioned, on the high seas is what they used to call Piracy.
|
Probably an opportune time for Iranians to practice "Duck and Cover."
- Ed |
As some here will know, I have been watching the Persian Gulf quite a lot over the last few weeks, mainly in relation to the cruise ships that are stuck there. Now with Trump stating that he will blockade the Strait of Hormuz, I wonder if he realises that there are at least 3 ships that belong to the Chinese Navy in the Persian Gulf (spotted via AIS upto around 4 days ago before their AIS faded out after 24 hours). Wondering if trapping Chinese Naval ships might cause an escalation in diplomatic collapses, on top of the mess that already exists. They will still be there cos the Strait was essentially scuppered and there has been a Chinese Naval presence in the Persian Gulf for the last 4-5 years. They had Type 815A ships in the Persian Gulf watching the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities last June.
Outside the Strait, in the Gulf of Oman there are several Naval ships of different nationality, including the UK, who are on anti-piracy duties (yes, that is still going on tween Salalah and Bab-el Mandeb Strait on the southern end of the Red Sea), all commercial ships also carry armed guards and LRAD in the area too. I have been searching for any other nationality in regard to Navy ships within the Persian Gulf when the latest conflict began, I suspect there might be since it has always been a regular occurrence to have visiting Navies in the area (when there in 2007, 2010, 2015 and 2019 there were several different nationalities in and around the Persian Gulf and in the Gulf of Oman, including South and North Korea). Afterall until this mess kicked off, there was free passage for anyone and everyone without any concern for Iranians making a problem, it had been largely quiet and relatively safe after the Iran / Iraq and Iraq / Kuwait conflicts. |
Two Chinese bulk carriers, Lai Zhou 66 and Brother Glory approaching the "toll booth" as I write. Let's see what happens.
MarineTraffic: Global Ship Tracking Intelligence | AIS Marine Traffic https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....a713fb62c6.jpg |
I have been searching for any other nationality in regard to Navy ships within the Persian Gulf There many nations who are desperate for their tankers to make it out of the Gulf as their reserves and petrol stations run dry and will be willing to send their navies to provide an escort. The dangers of a naval confrontation if the USN tries to board or stop them are far higher than they are/were off Venezuela. https://www.marineinsight.com/indian...-persian-gulf/ Indian Navy Launches Emergency Mission To Rescue 18 Stranded Ships In Persian Gulf April 11th.The Indian Navy and the multi-ministry task force are evacuating 18 ships stranded in the Strait of Hormuz, carrying cargo bound for India. The operation aims to restore energy security in the country and clear more than 100,000 TEUs of backlogged cargo at Indian ports. The Government made the plan so oil tankers, LPG and LNG carriers could return safely with their cargo as Indian ports suffer from severe bottlenecks due to the U.S-Iran war. Of the 18 ships, 4 are LPG Carriers, 3 are LNG Ships, and 11 are crude oil tankers. Among these 5 are sailing under the Indian flag, while the remaining have been leased by Indian companies. At present, there are 15 Indian-linked vessels west of the Strait of Hormuz, 3 each in the Gulf of Oman and the Gulf of Aden, and 2 in the Red Sea……. |
Reports running around that the UK and 'other countries' Mine Sweepers are going to be deployed in the strait.
Trump said something like 'we have the latest and greatest mine sweepers, and there will be other traditional mine sweepers... I guess that means every other country. :E |
A few thoughts from what I've been listening to on geo-strategic analysis chat:
The aborted Pakistan peace talks were nothing but theatre. Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are energy dependent, which is why Pakistan cobbled together a peace deal, but presented a different 'deal' to both sides (hence the confusion over wether Lebanon was included in it). The real reason is firstly that the Americans are using the talks as a stalling tactic while they and the Gulf states rearm interceptors and position the George HW Bush, to carry on the war to the required conclusion. Interceptor stocks are reduced by about 60% so are being supplemented from Greece Taiwan and North Korea. About 800 Tomahawks have been used, another 600 are on their way for round 2. Round 2 will not be required if the show of strength suffices. The US has lost 17 MQ-9s. 18 more are on the way to replace them. The Iranian economy is about a month max from total collapse, even allowing for religious taxes collected from some Shia religious strands worldwide. The second reason is to allow the Israeli Air Force to divert resources to finish off a 70% weapons restocked Hezbollah (who rearmed largely courtesy of chaos in Syria). The strikes there were to specific IP addresses of a Zoom meeting which was planning a Hezbollah-led coup of Lebanon. About 60 were attending a meeting online. The number of casualties was across the country and obviously many of them were civilians not involved. A price worth paying, it may be said, to avoid a coup which would have killed many, many more. The third reason, it may be argued, was market manipulation. Cool the oil prices, so when hostilities recommence they will do so from a lower baseline. It also enables those with the clout to do so to profit from the bounce-back. The USA will not cease hostilities until the regime gives up the nuclear material and ceases the enrichment programme peemenantly. In doing this, they are backed by the vulnerable Gulf states. USA and the Gulf States have had enough of the Islamist regime in Iran. European nations broadly believe in appeasement of the Islamic Republic, much as they did regarding the Nazis in the 1930s, despite all the evidence of many years of talks which were going nowhere - other than giving Iran the time that it needed to go nuclear. Trump's frustration is that he's used to dealing with a muscular way of negotiating iaw real estate 'art of the deal' practice, and can't get his head around the Islamist apocalyptic ('Bring it on') POV. If the US is forced to cease the war due to domestic opposition, the signal of the USA being defeated by a middle rate power will result in loss of confidence in the $ as the reserve currency and a crisis of confidence in global stability. |
Originally Posted by Dave Ed
(Post 12068953)
Two Chinese bulk carriers, Lai Zhou 66 and Brother Glory approaching the "toll booth" as I write. Let's see what happens.
MarineTraffic: Global Ship Tracking Intelligence | AIS Marine Traffic The IRGC claims to have laid a few nasty tochmemurgh in the former international shipping route through the Strait, in order to force traffic through the “toll booth” in Iranian waters, and the USN claims to be looking for these and cracking them if found in order to reestablish normal shipping routes. “if found” is the crunch, because it may be very hard to gain 100% assurance of clearance if sophisticated types were laid .... or even not laid in the first place. Now - just supposin’ ! - the USAF were to respond in kind by laying ‘smart’ eggs ( which are very hard to crack ) in the ‘toll booth’ lanes, thus forcing all traffic - including that deemed ‘friendly’ by the IRGC! - back into the normal traffic lanes ... which might then be mine free. Interesting times, and quite a complex scenario mix ..... discuss.... |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 12068919)
No. Merely stopping or turning around a ship falls well short of piracy. Interdict seems the correct word [unusual if coming from Agent Orange's gob]
Hi LB, a naval blockade is classified as an act of war and an agressive act. You don’t need to sink the ships to have that status, impeding the right of innocent passage triggers the act of war condition, something that China seems to have a problem in translation with. it is not often that I agree with something that agent orange does, but imposing a counter blockade was such an obvious move that it only took a week for it to sink into the “a great brain” of the supreme leader, agent orange. the effect of the counter blockade is to put Iran on a clock to collapse. The US can certainly wit them out, if they keep their public opinion onside once the 60 day clock for congressional approval has timex’d. to get congressional approval AO will likely need to set forth what the reason for the fracas was, not too hard, and to explain what the aim of the entertainment is, and how they intend to achieve that. Putting a filter on his tweets might save him from himself, he still retains the ability to pour gasoline on any matter and to hold a lot match above his glorious shock of hair. Israel needs to state clearly what their objective is in Lebanon, on the surface of it, it appears to be a brutal attack on civilians. The truth may be different, and Lebanon has Hezbollah as a greater military power than the official Lebanese army, it is a messed up Iranian controlled vassal state. In recent times, the attack on the Israeli peace/music festival and the hostage taking would seem to have had rather unfortunate consequences. Blockading the straits by the US denying any income to Iran is the fastest way to get a rational response from Iran. The demands for a ceasefire need some clarity, something that in itself is not a forte of Agent Orange, they might do better to get someone who has fewer signs of senility going on. This all then brings the point up, should the blockade involve other nations, despite the current “you broke it, you fix it” case, and given the conditions now, it may very well be the case that the best outcome is a coalition of naval forces to block Iran, this being the firmest message that Iran can receive. the sad bit of this is, the behaviour of Israel and the US makes a compelling case for all nations to have nuclear munitions, the delivery systems can be simple, they don’t need ICBMs to give a bit of pause. |
What I'm struggling to understand is how the US Navy could effectively blockade the Strait.
That north coast is a rabbit warren of buried military sites, drone launch sites, and mobile missile launchers. Surely Iran could hit ships in the Strait from well inland as well. Am I missing something here? |
Originally Posted by tartare
(Post 12069099)
What I'm struggling to understand is how the US Navy could effectively blockade the Strait.
That north coast is a rabbit warren of buried military sites, drone launch sites, and mobile missile launchers. Surely Iran could hit ships in the Strait from well inland as well. Am I missing something here? |
I imagine they'll keep an eye on who passes through the Straits, then approach them in the relative safety of the Gulf of Oman.
Interesting to know what happens to inbound vessels... |
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 12068959)
The Indian navy is there as well.
There many nations who are desperate for their tankers to make it out of the Gulf as their reserves and petrol stations run dry and will be willing to send their navies to provide an escort. The dangers of a naval confrontation if the USN tries to board or stop them are far higher than they are/were off Venezuela. https://www.marineinsight.com/indian...-persian-gulf/ Bandar Abbas is always popular with Chinese, Russian and North Korean Navy ships. Barely a week goes by where those nations don't have at least one or two ships in port. It seems that Hegseth and Trump might not have thought things through very well, if at all, again. Having a (putting it mildly) diplomatic incident tween "unfriendly" Navies really would not be advised, I would have thought anyway but you never know what is floating within the braincells of the US administration. There are also rumours...only rumours...that China is busy replenishing and rebuilding Iran's air defence infrastructure, which if true could prove difficult for Trump / Hegseth should they decide to start kicking off again. The potential for escalation is enormous, even if another Navy's ship is accidently targetted rather than purposely, it could all go very badly, very quickly.....in all aspects from lives lost, environmental disaster and financially. |
CENTCOM press release: https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS-...iranian-ports/
PRESS RELEASE | April 12, 2026 U.S. to Blockade Ships Entering or Exiting Iranian Ports USCENTCOM TAMPA, Fla. — U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) forces will begin implementing a blockade of all maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports on April 13 at 10 a.m. ET, in accordance with the President’s proclamation. The blockade will be enforced impartially against vessels of all nations entering or departing Iranian ports and coastal areas, including all Iranian ports on the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. CENTCOM forces will not impede freedom of navigation for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz to and from non-Iranian ports. Additional information will be provided to commercial mariners through a formal notice prior to the start of the blockade. All mariners are advised to monitor Notice to Mariners broadcasts and contact U.S. naval forces on bridge-to-bridge channel 16 when operating in the Gulf of Oman and Strait of Hormuz approaches. |
Originally Posted by West Coast
(Post 12069109)
You summarized it, the insurance companies won’t risk it.
I assume the strategy is to stop anything at all exiting - thereby starving the regime of revenue. Because to effectively open the Strait up, the US would presumably have to effectively carpet bomb the entire North coast, and inland, and then hold Iranian reinforcements at bay - just not doable even for the US forces in theatre now? |
He also intends preventing any ships leaving that paid the toll. At least the US will be able to claim that they have closed the Strait, not Iran, so another victory.
While it is intended to put additional pressure on Iran, it does seem to be a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Another unintended consequence of surrounding yourself with yes-men that are not the sharpest pencils in the pack. At least we have more cost increases and inflation to look forward to. That will go down well with the domestic and global public. It will be interesting to see if the Iranians will try target the ships enforcing the blockade and those allegedly being sent to sweep for mines. If they manage to sink or damage one it would be very embarrassing for the administration. |
Originally Posted by tartare
(Post 12069175)
Indeed. Again, unless I'm missing something, there's no way the US Navy could escort ships through the Strait - it'd be a turkey shoot.
I assume the strategy is to stop anything at all exiting - thereby starving the regime of revenue. Because to effectively open the Strait up, the US would presumably have to effectively carpet bomb the entire North coast, and inland, and then hold Iranian reinforcements at bay - just not doable even for the US forces in theatre now? CENTCOM J2/J3 ought to have anticipated an attempt to close the strait and as a matter of course ought to have malleted every known storage location of sea mines, every small harbour (there are surprisingly few) with IRGC FIAC and of course the main naval bases, targeting the Kilos and Ghadirs. That leaves the missile threat, which - again - ought to have been targetted relatively early. There is nigh-on air supremacy, which means that persistent ISR with on-call strike should be achievable. All of the above should - big if here - reduce the threat to relatively residual levels and each launch / disclosure further depletes the threat. Still significant risk, but some successful transits might actually shift the P&I market. Note - the word "ought" above is doing some seriously heavy lifting. |
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
(Post 12069193)
but some successful transits might actually shift the P&I market.
There isn't likely to be any appetite to insure those vessels, or if they do, without a significant increase in cost and deductibles - paying the toll would be better financially. It is unlikely any actuarial model would look favourably at the current risk of transiting the strait while hostilities continue. It just takes one cheap drone hitting its target. The US could follow through on a previous idea to insure vessels, after all, if you break it, you should fix it. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:37. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.