Its been a looooooong time since I last boarded a vessel, and I never boarded a sub that is for sure, but that didn't look like any CG boarding I ever did! Very gutsy move to just jump onto that sub. Not sure I would have done that with all that gear on. Its dangerous enough to board a ship when you are alongside and they are trying to coordinate the process with you, let alone one thats trying to escape you. I can't imagine why they wouldn't use some means to disable that sub before just having a guy jump on to it. Things have obviously changed in the 35 years since I was on a Cutter.

I owe my legs to a massive Gunner's Mate who grabbed me by the collar as I slipped while boarding a boat from our motor surfboat. He prevented me from falling in between the two vessels. I'm sure my legs being crushed would have been the best I could have hoped for. We normally had at least two guys with .45s and one with a shotgun when we went onboard a boat, and would send more guys if the boat was big enough.

During my time in the Coast Guard the drug war was pretty much a gentleman's game. They didn't shoot at us because we always had superior fire power displayed and ready for action. It would be foolish to go up against a CG Cutter with 50 caliber guns manned and as has been mentioned the guys on the boats were usually bit players who were either deported to their home country or able to make bail pretty quickly if they were Americans.

Later on as I was flying for the CG we started arming some of our helicopters as well and they did engage a few boats with disabling fire (as did a few Cutters) but that was pretty rare. Don't know of any out and out fire fights between CG assets and drug runners.

Didn't see any flag on that vessel, so it would be considered stateless which would mean the US Coast Guard could assert US authority over it (essentially deeming it to be an US vessel) so it could board it pretty much anywhere except the territorial waters of another country. Again, if my memory serves me correctly after all these years.


My hat is off to the guy in the video, Semper Paratus!

quote:

Originally posted by Sigfan Roy:
Its been a looooooong time since I last boarded a vessel, and I never boarded a sub that is for sure, but that didn't look like any CG boarding I ever did! Very gutsy move to just jump onto that sub. Not sure I would have done that with all that gear on...

Much is said about Navy and Marine boarding crews. However, I got to see Coast Guard teams in action. Always impressive and professional. On the range, they could shoot with best guys in uniform. Very underrated.

quote:

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

Originally posted by Sigfan Roy:
Its been a looooooong time since I last boarded a vessel, and I never boarded a sub that is for sure, but that didn't look like any CG boarding I ever did! Very gutsy move to just jump onto that sub. Not sure I would have done that with all that gear on...

Much is said about Navy and Marine boarding crews. However, I got to see Coast Guard teams in action. Always impressive and professional. On the range, they could shoot with best guys in uniform. Very underrated.

The USCG is very professional both in terms of navigation and in the amount of lives they save and the situations they save those lives in, yet get little credit or noticed by most people.

Here's the un-edited video and there are 3 coasties on top of the submarine when the hatch opens.


https://www.foxnews.com/us/vid...znAo0maNNj6pKxlefYbw

quote:

Originally posted by Sigfan Roy:
Its been a looooooong time since I last boarded a vessel, and I never boarded a sub that is for sure, but that didn't look like any CG boarding I ever did! Very gutsy move to just jump onto that sub. Not sure I would have done that with all that gear on. Its dangerous enough to board a ship when you are alongside and they are trying to coordinate the process with you, let alone one thats trying to escape you. I can't imagine why they wouldn't use some means to disable that sub before just having a guy jump on to it. Things have obviously changed in the 35 years since I was on a Cutter.

USCG has changed up their structure a bit since you were last in, one that applies here is those guys were likely apart of a drug interdiction team from one of the many units within the Deployable Operations Group. Maybe more kinetic than what some old salts are used to but, more funding too.

Those Deployable Ops units were just starting to form up in the early 80s, they were a big part of the effort to get the CG more closely aligned with the DOD and "joint" efforts among the services. One of them was based out of ATC Mobile for a while I think, in the basement of the BOQ/BEQ/Galley building.

My goal was to get off the ship as quickly as possible and go to flight school, so I didn't follow the surface ops units very closely. One of the very early COs of one of those teams was a guy named Tom Atkin. His older brother Bob was also a skipper of one of those teams. That program was very high vis and very important to the CG. Tom was the first guy from our Academy class to make Admiral, deep selected by 2 or 3 years, largely due to his work in that program and may have been the first Commander of the DOG when it was formally stood up. Not sure about that. Kind of a shame that Papp decommissioned that program, but that seems to be the way of the war on drugs.

I flew Falcons until 2002 and then retired, hadn't really ever thought of myself as an old salt but I guess the description pretty much fits now. I always thought of my Dad as an old salt, he was in from 1954 to 1984. Guess we're both old salts now

Best comment on the news article:

First no more Epstein parties and now no cocaine...what will Hollywood do this weekend?

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:

quote:

Originally posted by Jimineer:
That soldier doesn’t look prepared for a dunk in the water, wearing boots and all that gear. Am I missing something?

Agreed, from what I can see.

If he had slipped, he'd be in a very, very position waiting for the recuse boat/raft.

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say that they know exactly what they are doing and they know the consequences and that there is a contingency plan in place for things going haywire.

Just because we don't understand what we're seeing in a sixty second clip, that doesn't make those guys reckless cowboys ten seconds from drowning.

They are most likely wearing neutrally buoyant plates, lightweight helmets, buoyant helmet liner, and maritime plate carrier. I doubt they would do something that risky in standard gear.

About 18 months ago we were visiting Huatulco, Mexico. A couple of locals mentioned that their navy had just captured a drug submarine. I wonder how many of these death traps are floating around in the Pacific.
Mike

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Just because we don't understand what we're seeing in a sixty second clip, that doesn't make those guys reckless cowboys ten seconds from drowning.

Agreed. I'd say they are all WELL prepared and trained for this type action. And I believe I saw a Cutter in the area (background in video) that could come to this bad-ass's aid should he fall in.

AFAIK, there is no legitimate use for this type of vessel. They are built explicitly for drug smuggling. The powers that be (UN or other) should pass a resolution that any vessel of this type at see will be considered and illegal smuggling vehicle, and an be sunk on sight. After the CG / USN sink a few, the cartels will have to come up with another trick.

quote:

Originally posted by LDD:

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
The problem is just because it looks like a modern day drug smuggling vessel does not mean it is, until you find the drugs on board.. So, shooting holes through a boat just because you assume it is carrying drugs is at least in my mind not a good idea. Ask Jimmy Buffet about this.

I'm guessing here, so I might just be wrong, that here boat isn't your average family boating experience-type vessel, right? Me, I'd assume that it IS carrying drugs and/or explosives, and blow the the **** out of it from a safe distance.

It's not illegal to pilot a semi-submersible in international waters.

Ferrying drugs, while illegal, is a criminal act, not an act of war.

Attacking an unarmed vessel of unknown nationality with unverified cargo and unknown passengers traveling in international waters could very easily be considered an act of war.

Death sentences aren't executed based on assumptions.

The response has to be proportionate to the act. Killing someone because you suspect them to be guilty of drug smuggling isn't going to hold up in an American court, which applies since the assets used in this operation are American.

The equation might change if the semi-submersibles shot back or carried suicide explosives, but that's not the case here.

The reason why these craft aren't shot up with .50 cal is the same reason why a van driving north on I-5 between San Diego and Seattle, full of fentanyl isn't shot up with .50 cal.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
AFAIK, there is no legitimate use for this type of vessel. They are built explicitly for drug smuggling.

Hmmm, now where have I heard this line of reasoning before....?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
AFAIK, there is no legitimate use for this type of vessel. They are built explicitly for drug smuggling.

Hmmm, now where have I heard this line of reasoning before....?

So what legitimate use is there for a oceangoing semi submersible?

And given that this is an open ocean issue, I doubt constitutional issues would apply.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
AFAIK, there is no legitimate use for this type of vessel. They are built explicitly for drug smuggling.

Hmmm, now where have I heard this line of reasoning before....?

Answering above
1. Fun. Someone might enjoy the challenge.
2. The Constitution doesn't grant rights. The rights are inalienable. It enumerates them.

1. This is pretty ridiculous. Someone might want to detonate 1000 lbs of ANFO without an explosives license for fun, but that's not going to stop them from getting locked up for it.

2. Makes for a good line, but is functionally false. You only have the rights you can enforce. If you don't believe this, talk to a lot of people in Russia, China, Myanmar, etc., etc. (if you can find them.)

quote:

Originally posted by ChuckFinley:
Answering above
1. Fun. Someone might enjoy the challenge.
2. The Constitution doesn't grant rights. The rights are inalienable. It enumerates them.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Originally posted by navyshooter:

quote:

wonder why they didn't dive...

They can't submerge completely under the surface. They need to snokle to keep their engines going.

The US Navy uses the surface search radar on ASW USW Helos to hunt them.

so basically its a ocean going low rider....

HRK for the win!

Some one mentioned the guys driving the sub popping off a round at the coast guard.... can you imagine anyone that dumb? Would make for a very bad day... worse than the video of the 130lb street punk deciding to fight it out with 8 New York City Cops... I suspect about 30 seconds of a 50 cal hitting that critter and it would be all over.