26 ms·
95% of container ships are now going around the Southern Tip of Africa
- cs702 3y agoWhat are the implications for shipping costs and times?
- chrisandchris 3y agoI guess it's the same as when the Suez canal was blocked [1] . It will result in about 2 weeks longer transportation time. Don't know about costs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Suez_Canal_obstruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Suez_Canal_obstruction
- mjbeswick 3y agoContainer ships use in the region of 150 to 250 metric tons of fuel per day, so $75,000 to $125,000 in fuel alone.
- jandrese 3y agoSpread out over thousands of containers that doesn't seem like a huge penalty.
- hef19898 3y agoWe'll see, if we care to look which I don't anymore since I'm not involved in sea freight for a while bow, how rates from Asia to Europe change. Because this rate change is what matters, not the additional cost for carriers.
- The_Colonel 3y agoThe extra time necessary, thus lower throughout, thus availability issues, will likely be the bigger problem than fuel.
- esel2k 3y agoExcept that back then people where drawing world end scenarios while today it sounds like “just a small detour”.
- poooogles 3y agoFrom China to the EU it adds roughly 1/3rd to the time, which is a decent proxy for cost. There are savings in not having to pay Suez fees but these don't seem to make a huge affect to shipping costs. It's probably worth adding that going round the cape doesn't add just more cost to fuel and time, insurance for cargo down there isn't cheap either as the weather is very changeable.
- bryanlarsen 3y agoIt's a great proxy for cost, but price has more to do with availability than with cost. I'd expect price to go up a lot more than 1/3rd, especially if this drags on.
- AnimalMuppet 3y agoRight, price is driven by supply and demand. If your ships have to travel 4/3 as far, you have ships available at 3/4 of the previous rate, so the supply of shipping went down. Demand didn't, so the price goes up.
- marvin 3y agoIf any Norwegians are reading, which are shipping nerds by virtue of geography, speculating in this market is essentially why John Fredriksen, the Warren Buffett of shipping, is rich. Shifts in ship availability causes waves of bankruptcy, and either gluts or shortages (whatever happens to be most inconvenient at the time).
- justrealist 3y agoHe estimated ~2% consumer price increase in a diff comment.
- hef19898 3y agoA two to three week longer transit time will increase sales prices of the imported product by 2%? I' d like to see the calculation behind that assumption...
- thfuran 3y agoWe probably can't quickly pull enough extra ships out of our hats to make up for the extra time they're spending in transit, so total shipping capacity will decrease. That may well have a large impact on shipping prices.
- AstroJetson 3y agoWith renewed unrest in the area (140mi 280km to Gaza), cost of sinking the entire cargo vs an extra two weeks is also a consideration.
- falcolas 3y agoThe trip is about 15 or so days, with the associated fuel costs. Granted, fuel costs are distributed across tens of thousands of containers, so the delay will probably be the bigger issue.
- dotnet00 3y agoPerun has a pretty nice long video presentation that talks about the factors involved and what they may mean for shipping: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GKlKYQDDcQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GKlKYQDDcQ Makes for good background listening.
- badpun 3y agoIt's not just shipping costs and times, but also (and perhaps most importantly) shipping's total capacity. The same fleet of ships can now make substantially less trips, which means that substantially less goods will be transported between Europe and Asia. Perhaps rising costs of shipping on this route will divert some ships from other routes around the world here, but overall outcome across entire world has be to less maritime commerce, leading to increase in prices of goods.
- reliablereason 3y agoThat is a terrible use of the Mercator projection. The extra distance around Africa looks comparatively small on the Mercator projection.
- thih9 3y ago> The extra distance around Africa looks comparatively small on the Mercator projection. Compared to what? I.e. what projection or approach would you choose instead of Mercator?
- dr-detroit 3y ago[dead]
- reliablereason 3y agoA projection that is better at showing the comparative difference in length between going through the Suez canal vs going around. The mercator makes Africa look comparatively small on the y-axis which is a problem if you are trying to visualise the size of Africa and the time it takes to go around the continent. If i visually compare the distance on the mercator and an equal area projection is looks to make the trip about 20% shorter on mercator (compared to the apparent visual distance going through Suez). Non of the projections will be 100% accurate but the mercator is less accurate for this specific case.
- labcomputer 3y ago> The mercator makes Africa look comparatively small on the y-axis which is a problem if you are trying to visualise the size of Africa and the time it takes to go around the continent. LOL. The Suez canal is at ~30°N, while Cape Town is ~35°S. If anything the Mercator projection is exaggerating the visual distance of going around.
- trgn 3y agoHating on Mercator is just pavlovian concern trolling at this point (it's the first thing people learn in their GIS classes, whatever). People are so obsessed with conservation of area, it's cringey, Freud would have something to say about that. Maps should always neatly establish a frame of reference. Unless you need to actually take out a ruler and measure a thingie of of it, projections don't matter all that much. The mercator map is an excellent world map: land masses nicely proportioned, straight reference lines that don't clutter, north is up thank god, no weird bulges, just rectangular, you know, like a page in a book or a website. It's just a really good world map. The haters are wrong 90% of the time.
- ur-whale 3y agoThe "why" part is sort of missing ...
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y agohttps://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/05/business/maersk-red-sea-shipping-suspended/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/05/business/maersk-red-sea-s... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/07/houthi-attacks-us-military-yemen-middle-east https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/07/houthi... https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2024/1/6/24027735/yemen-houthi-red-sea-united-states-navy-coalition-maersk-hamas-gaza-israel https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2024/1/6/24027735/yemen-h... A google for keywords including some of "attack ships red sea houthi" will provide some context
- thih9 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_involvement_in_the_Israel–Hamas_war#Attacks_on_shipping_in_the_Red_Sea_and_Indian_Ocean_2023-2024 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_involvement_in_the_Isra... https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/more-ships-avoid-red-sea-attacks-disrupt-world-trade-2023-12-21/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/more-ships-avoid-r...
- H8crilA 3y agoAnd before someone says the equivalent of "just blow them off the map" - this will likely be worse than Afganistan. North Yemen has been bombed for close to a decade already by Saudis and others, and the Saudis eventually decided to negotiate via Chinese mediation. I don't know ho likely it is to work, but splitting Yemen into recognized North Yemen and South Yemen may be a good diplomatic solution.
- actionfromafar 3y agoOr an easily thawed frozen conflict. The root problems are spelled Saudi Arabia vs Iran and almost certainly somewhere in the curtains, some Russian cheer leading.
- SideburnsOfDoom 3y agoGood news for the port of Cape Town? Cape Town was originally founded in 1652 "as a supply station for Dutch ships sailing to the Far East." i.e. as a half-way point on this route around Africa. But then in 1869 the Suez canal opened.
- KineticLensman 3y agoGiven that the ships primarily being diverted are freighters / container ships travelling from the east to the west (and vice versa), it's not obvious why they should stop in Cape Town (since they don't need to refuel, and it makes no sense to unload at Cape Town). So no major benefit to Cape Town.
- thfuran 3y agoOnly if ships still stop halfway for supplies.
- rob74 3y agoNot really... the container ships will be steaming right by, they don't need to take on supplies like 3 centuries ago.
- lgleason 3y agoThey may need to stop to refuel. That said Durban had the bigger port these days. The bigger issue would be if Transnet has enough capacity to be able to handle the extra demand since it has had trouble with it's day to day operations lately.
- thih9 3y ago- "Red Sea attacks disrupt world trade, more ships vow to avoid waters": https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/more-ships-avoid-red-sea-attacks-disrupt-world-trade-2023-12-21/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/more-ships-avoid-r... (Reuters, December 22 2023) - "Houthi involvement in the Israel–Hamas war": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_involvement_in_the_Israel–Hamas_war#Attacks_on_shipping_in_the_Red_Sea_and_Indian_Ocean_2023-2024 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_involvement_in_the_Isra... (Wikipedia) - "Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38821372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38821372 (HN, December 31st 2023)
- Almondsetat 3y agoCan someone explain why when the Evergiven blocked the Suez canal for a few days the news reported it with such catastrophistic tones but now that the canal is effectively blocked by Iran-backed forces nobody screams about a global crisis?
- asylteltine 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tiltowait 3y agoMaybe the realization that it didn't lead to End Times back then, so such hystrionics this time around would be met with great rolling of eyes?
- burkaman 3y agoI don't remember the catastrophic tones, but I would guess there was heavier coverage for the Ever Given incident because several hundred container ships were effectively stuck until that was resolved. In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. It's the difference between "Atlanta Airport shut down indefinitely, all flights cancelled until further notice" and "Bad weather in Atlanta, all flights delayed". Both are newsworthy, but the latter doesn't generate as many headlines. Not to downplay the violence in the Red Sea, obviously it's a lot more serious than bad weather, but I think the analogy is ok.
- serf 3y ago> In this case nothing is stuck, ships are just taking a slower route. that might be what parent is mentioning : this alternative route was sold to the news-viewing public as absolutely impossible and untenable when producing profit over time -- they were told that the suez canal was of vital importance and that trade must halt until it was cleared. and now suddenly, not much time afterwards, the threat of violence has prompted the realization that there are clear and viable alternatives to the suez canal. the 180 on the importance of the canal feels telling, but I don't know how. I presume it's an effort to keep public opinion from desiring a strong military response in the area. It feels like election-time stalling so that "Cleaning up the Red Sea" can be a political talking point during election season -- but I hate to be so cynical as to think we're ignoring a global political partner for the sake of a politician having an ace up their sleeve during debates.
- asylteltine 3y agoI hate twitter posts. They never have any context and post as if you have all of the context already. And you can’t even see original posts or replies without being logged in. Please don’t post twitter or be kind and just use nitter
- josefresco 3y agoYou might prefer this: https://www.flexport.com/blog/global-ocean-carriers-halt-red-sea-transits-what-to-expect/ https://www.flexport.com/blog/global-ocean-carriers-halt-red...
- wahnfrieden 3y agothis is a voting-based site
- kibwen 3y agoIf it were possible to downvote posts on HN, I'd have been downvoting every Twitter link for the past decade. Please post somewhere that's actually readable.
- MOARDONGZPLZ 3y agoOne cannot downvote submissions, only comments. This seems to be largely a non-sequitur as one can only not vote up something. I have, for example, downvoted your comment as it is not useful and is a bit snide or condescending (inclusive “or” to be clear), whereas had you posted your comment as a post, I would not have been able to do so.
- observationist 3y agoNitter allows people to see the context of a thread without having to log in to Twitter. By posting a nitter link, you're enriching the conversation instead of either annoying people or doing marketing for x/twitter. The platform shouldn't be the point of a conversation. If a platform makes itself the center of attention, there's something wrong with it.
- 3y ago
- josefresco 3y agoAnother link, directly to Flexport: https://www.flexport.com/blog/global-ocean-carriers-halt-red-sea-transits-what-to-expect/ https://www.flexport.com/blog/global-ocean-carriers-halt-red...
- alecco 3y ago> DECEMBER 20, 2023
- focusedone 3y agoLooks regularly updated, most recently January 5.
- jokoon 3y agoIf this keeps escalating, the US might get more involved
- bbor 3y agoI can’t tell if this comment is a joke or not but I agree! It’s just funny to see that on the story “95% of traffic through the Suez Canal diverted” —- seems pretty escalated!
- kube-system 3y agoI presume by escalation, they are referring to the entire conflict, not just the diversion of traffic.
- diggan 3y ago[flagged]
- r00fus 3y agoDid you hear about Operation Prosperity Guardian and its complete failure to address the situation?
- briffle 3y agoI don't undertand why the EU isn't all over this. those containerships are mostly going to them. I'm also curious how long this route around africa is the best option, since right now, its summer in the southern hemisphere.. I seem to remember hearing that winters around the cape of Africa are pretty legendary.
- Analemma_ 3y agoI have a suspicion that it's the same reason European aid to Ukraine has so far been a tiny fraction of what was publicly pledged: western European military capabilities are much, much more degraded than anyone is publicly admitting. After the collapse of the USSR it was fine to just write off defense capabilities for a while and lean on the American security shield, but now after ~35 years of kicking that can down the road there's nothing useful they can do to to help against a bunch of unguided rockets getting fired from the desert, never mind a shooting war with Russia.
- seydor 3y agoAnother bonanza for shipowners
- _xnmw 3y agoLots of people wondering why we haven't wiped the pirates off the map yet. First of all, Saudi has been trying to do that for years (with US support) and failing. I think it shows how much leverage the Houthis have, and how much cheap drone technology has changed the nature of warfare. They have 3 hands to play: 1. Attack Saudi Arabia's oil infra with cheap drones and threaten 1/3 the world's energy. These drones cost 10x to 100x more to shoot down. 2. Start another Arab Spring, counting on the fact that the Houthis enjoy massive popularity in the Muslim world right now, among Sunni and Shia both, for opposing Israel. 3. Drag the US into another Afghanistan, which nobody wants. See: https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2024/0104/Gaza-war-Why-Houthis-pose-a-stubborn-challenge-to-US-in-Red-Sea https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2024/0104/Gaza-w...
- taeric 3y agoThis feels too reduced in options and reasoning, to be honest. I would be surprised if any of those three options pan out, mid term. To expand a little, I don't understand how the Houthis have support right now, outside of support that is specifically about destabilizing the entire region. Which is why I don't see your brief paragraph being enough to explain things. You do mention US support in there; who else is involved? And why?
- mattas 3y agoI'm particularly interested in how Egypt responds to this. They lose about $300,000 per vessel that diverts around the cape. In fiscal 2023, about 25,000 vessels went through the canal.
- LargeTomato 3y agoWhat can they do? They are the longest standing Arab security partner to the West and Israel. They gave Israel early warning about the attacks. They locked down the Palestine border at the request of Israel and are cooperating with the US and Israel on aid flowing into Palestine. They only control the Suez (north Red Sea) and the Houthis are across-the-sea from Somalia. Egypt couldn't defend against Houthi rockets if they wanted to. Egypt has a vested interest in stabilizing the region and returning to the status quo. They are politically and economically aligned with the West and Israel and their best, and only, option is to remain a stable partner.
- sparrc 3y agoThey're free to patrol the waters in the South Red Sea though. Doesn't Egypt have a navy? To me this situation seems like it would warrant sending nearly their entire fleet to the South Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.
- LargeTomato 3y agoGood questions! Egypt doesn't have the advanced anti missile cruisers. Egypt has a massive tank force. There is already a multi national naval fleet in the Red Sea patrolling the waters. Mostly US but also UK and some others. Edit There's more :) Egypt can't counter the missiles better than the US can, but it could certainly get pulled into a larger conflict if it started deploying military assets outside it's borders. They can't really make their situation better but they can definitely make it worse.
- mikeyouse 3y agoThe danger isn't primarily from other ships that the Egyptian Navy could chase off but from land-based cruise missiles launched by the Houthis. The US Navy's most advanced weapons systems can intercept most of the missiles but not all of them, and at some considerable degree of risk to the US vessels. The only military option to stop the attacks are drone / bomber incursions into Yemen which of course Egypt has no interest in doing since it could turn into a full hot war pretty easily.
- neonate 3y agohttps://nitter.net/typesfast/status/1743654060673093754 https://nitter.net/typesfast/status/1743654060673093754
- johnea 3y agoA better link (actual article not a twit): http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/maritime-shipping-disaster-unfolds-in-red-sea/ http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/maritime-shipping-disaster-...
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y agoThat's a black-eye to US foreign policy IMO. A major mission for the US Navy during peacetime is to preserve and defend maritime trade but they have failed.
- f6v 3y agoExcept US is not at peacetime, it’s engaged in one of the biggest wars in recent history. Something people don’t realize is that US has been struggling to coerce partners into delivering more air defense systems into Ukraine. Now, fighting off missiles in Red Sea is a cherry on top.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoNice 'partners', that you casually coerce into compliance
- thehappypm 3y agoNo, it’s a sign of strategy. Being the world’s policeman is bad policy these days.
- drumhead 3y agoYou cant get insurance for sailing in a conflict zone.
- iammjm 3y agoThis ain’t cheap tho
- bluGill 3y agoSure you can. However it costs a lot more money and so most lines find it cheaper to go around war zones.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoCan you provide source of your outlandish claim?
- margalabargala 3y agoOn the contrary, the outlandish claim seems to be that anything could be impossible to insure. Insure profitably? Sure. At some point, the cost of the premium exceeds the cost of the thing being insured, making it pointless to insure. Some people describe this scenario as something being "impossible to insure", but it's not meant in the literal sense. In fact I would argue that there is no insurance company that would decline to insure a $100 million cargo through a combat zone, if the premium offered was $150 million.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoSo no actual source?
- bmicraft 3y agoThe article from flexport states that insurance rates through there are 3.5x of what they were in the beginning of december
- 3y ago
- feedforward 3y agoThe incredible bravery of the Houthis, who have very limited arms and resources is inspiring to me. They want the genocide in Gaza to end. This is what a real humanitarian intervention is. That a small band of brave people with limited resources can have such an effect is as inspiring as their bravery.
- shashashasha___ 3y agothey want it to end? thats the goal? do you support them? do you support their official slogan "God is the Greatest Death to America Death to Israel A Curse Upon the Jews Victory to Islam"? does that sound like a bunch of people who just want peace in the middle east? do you understand that they are a genocidal force on their own? stated very clearly in their official slogan
- nerfbatplz 3y agoThey’ve been at the sharp end of Uncle Sam’s finest munitions for a decade, they have earned the right to hate America. They haven’t attacked any other countries, they haven’t even killed anyone in any of their ship attacks.
- giraffe_lady 3y agoYeah something that is really hard to see in these US and Europe focused HN comment sections is that the united states is the legitimate enemy of a great many people. They have not imagined or misunderstood the situation. We will, and in many cases have, destabilized their countries, armed despots and helped execute coups, routinely killed civilians including children, blockaded regions causing famine and preventable death by the millions. We justify this that it is better for the world overall if we do it. Maybe we are right. But that doesn't put the legs back on your children we cannot expect everyone to love us for it.
- xinuc 3y agoA good reading about this is of course Noam Chomsky.
- tehjoker 3y agoGood. Economic sanctions like this will help bring to heel the genocidaires in Israel and the United States.
- elric 3y agoWhat's the impact on emissions? On the price of goods being transported?
- Solvency 3y agoEmissions? Bad. Really really bad.
- gumballindie 3y agoCurious if people will demand we shop less rather than condemn the attackers.
- elric 3y agoWhy not both?
- gumballindie 3y agoI am all for consuming less, for more than one reason, but i am not keen on people taking the side of pirates. That might make me want to consume harder to be honest.
- solarpunk 3y agothis is nonsensical.
- gumballindie 3y agoIn hindsight it is.
- lebean 3y agoThat's been happening, but is that a surprise?
- nottorp 3y ago
- pfdietz 3y agoThis is a great opportunity for the US to encourage an increase in US-flagged merchant vessels.
- swarnie 3y agoTo print a bigger target on them? What?
- rrr_oh_man 3y agoWhy?
- pfdietz 3y agoAttacks on US flagged ships are acts of war against the US, which you would think would cause hesitation on the part of the Houthi and Iran. And having more US-flagged ships helps the US maintain a logistic capability in the face of larger wars.
- miguelazo 3y agoAttribution for these is difficult. Many non-state actors involved. Maybe the US can launch another failed war against a concept (terror, drugs, etc)
- red-iron-pine 3y agothis ain't obscure APT hacking. in this case it's pretty clearly the Houthi-let Yemeni government, which is a proxy for Iran, and all parties have been pretty vocal about it.
- rurp 3y agoThere isn't any question that Iran proxies, including the Houthis, have been attacking American assets. No major actor disputes this. The tricky part is what to do about it. The Iranian proxies have been trying to strike a balance of harming/harassing US forces while keeping the attacks at a low enough level to avoid a major retaliation and full blown war. Calibrating the right response is not a trivial problem.
- huytersd 3y agoBack to Magellan times I see.
- dottjt 3y agoIsn't the obvious answer here just to require all ships passing through the red sea to equip anti-drone technology? I understand those interceptor missiles are super expensive because they're designed to shoot down everything, but surely there's a much cheaper, automated technology that destroys drones specifically? Don't get me wrong, this approach also causes all sorts of issues, but isn't this basically what they do in other countries facing potentially threatening situations like South Africa i.e. farmers carrying guns etc.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> obvious answer here just to require all ships passing through the red sea to equip anti-drone technology? Who will require this? You’d also need every port that ship approaches and every nation whose waters it transits to clear active military equipment on a civilian vessel.
- TylerE 3y agoNot just that, but most commercial ships are registered in places like Panama specifically because they have almost no rules.
- zirror 3y agoThey also have anti ship missles, plus it’s not a one size fits all approach.
- akira2501 3y agoI don't think the "obvious answer" is to engage in a mandatory arms race over shipping channels. The most obvious thing is to put commerce aside for a few minutes while we address these extremely serious social and political issues.
- heresie-dabord 3y ago
- engineer_22 3y ago> 95% of container ships that would’ve transited the Red Sea are now going around the Southern Tip of Africa as of this morning. The ships diverting from their ordinary course are marked orange on the @flexport map below. Notably some already IN the red sea
- spaceman_2020 3y agoThis can’t be good for inflation, can it?
- alephnerd 3y agoFor Europe maybe. The US uses the Pacific to trade with APAC. Edit: am wrong. See below
- maxmcd 3y agoAnother response in the linked twitter thread seems to indicate this is directly affecting US shipping prices: https://x.com/typesfast/status/1743657342280098135?s=20 https://x.com/typesfast/status/1743657342280098135?s=20
- thomastjeffery 3y agoPlease fix the title. > 95% of container ships that would’ve transited the Red Sea are now going around the Southern Tip of Africa
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y agoThat is helpful context which disambiguates an otherwise confusing title but I also suspect that the submitter ran into a character-length limit on the title. It would be hard to fit that statement into a certain length without omitting some relevant detail.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago> 95% of container ships are now going around the Southern Tip of Africa > 95% of Red Sea container ship traffic now going around South Africa
- christkv 3y agoThis will cause a lag in the world logistics causing supply issues again in the next couple of months I think.
- TomK32 3y agoThere is simply no way around hitting Iran. Hard. Take out it's airfields and factories, if it's power player are hit as well, like Soleimani was, it could give the young population a chance to get rid of the old mullahs and regain their freedom. This will benefit in both conflicts and give a very clear sign to China that Taiwan isn't that interesting after all...
- mardifoufs 3y agoWhy? I thought economic sanctions through the threats of armed action is fine, especially when it is to "sanction" a state that is killing thousands and thousands of civilians. I'm sure you don't think sanctioning states who are actively and openly wiping out civilians is bad? Even russia isn't this blatant and open with its goals. >On October 10th an Israeli official told a television station: “Gaza will eventually turn into a city of tents. There will be no buildings.” Daniel Hagari, an idf spokesperson, boasted that “hundreds of tons of bombs” had been dropped on Gaza. Then, he added: “the emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy.” That sure sound like something that should attract sanctions and actual military force to prevent.
- elzbardico 3y agoThis is the real world. Not a Braddock movie from the 80's. The US had a really hard time on Afghanistan, what make you think that Iran would be suck a walk in the park. And also, have you ever considered the logistic nightmare of a war against China right on their backyard? Unless you're rooting for a global thermonuclear war, there's no way the US couldn't prevent a Chinese invasion of Taiwan without losing a few Aircraft Carriers. The US doesn't have this capability, don't have the industrial base, the money and the raw resources for that.
- paganel 3y agoThis proves that world-wide sea supremacy by the US is now de facto gone, if there really was such a concept to begin with. I wonder when will political forces inside of the US proper start questioning the opportunity costs of maintaining 11 aircraft carriers given current events, probably not until the next big-ish war proves their futility for good.
- thehappypm 3y agoNavies have always been crucial for traditional wars. That’s not going to change so long as war with China or Russia is still (a distant) possibility.
- paganel 3y agoThey haven't been crucial vs. Germany during WW2, which arguably was where all the big powers were concentrated on. And I'd say that even during for WW1, the naval battles didn't have that much of an effect on how the war ended, in fact after the Battle of Jutland (summer of 1916) both the British and the German navies were de facto fleets in being. Later edit: I could make a point, and a very valid one, for the strategic importance of subs (the WW2 Japanese merchant fleet was mostly sunk by US subs, for example), but unfortunately for the US subs fleet people are not thinking about them first and foremost when the US Navy is mentioned. Of course, all this talk ignores the nuclear thing, this discussion is entirely made while focusing on the conventional way of waging war. If nuclear were to be a real option then all prior assumptions about the next big war would dramatically change.
- thehappypm 3y agoNavies were certainly crucial in the European theater of WW2. Britain was supplied by sea, and that was only possible with navies and merchant marines protecting the shipping lanes and hunting U-boats. It might not have been as dramatic as the Pacific theater with their big battles at sea, but the resilience of the Allied navies to keeping those shipping lanes limping along allowed them to eventually win the war. War is hugely about logistics. Probably the most notable naval moment in the European war (D-Day) was also only possible because the German navies couldn't dominate the channel. If the Germans had dominated the channel, D-Day would have been impossible. So, a lack of naval strength there was a critical factor for the Axis losing.
- devnull42069 3y ago[flagged]
- js4ever 3y ago[flagged]
- devnull42069 3y ago[flagged]
- js4ever 3y ago[flagged]
- dang 3y agoYou can't post to HN like this, no matter how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. We ban accounts that do it, so please don't do it again. I've banned the other account since it was obviously created to break HN's guidelines. I'm not banning yours, because you have a longer history here. But we need you to follow the rules if you want to keep posting. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
- js4ever 3y agoNoted, that won't happen again Thanks
- pard68 3y agoAre the drones fire and forget? Why has EW countermeasures not effectively crippled their ability to target ships?
- topspin 3y ago> Why has EW countermeasures not effectively EW is highly overrated. The EM spectrum is large, transceivers are agile and high gain antennas are inexpensive and easy to operate. Thus, any conceivable EW countermeasure you imagine has a short expiration date: the problem is highly asymmetric.
- fhub 3y agoCurrent generation interceptor missiles are in the single digit millions and have speciality launch platforms. But could these cargo ships launch a couple of dozen loitering interceptor munitions (think something like Anduril Roadrunner) when in the danger zones and loiter at 40m altitude in an arc around the ship and detect and intercept a missile traveling at 300m/s at altitude 7m - 40m?
- solarpunk 3y agowould this system, its deployment, replenishment, and upkeep cost less than simply avoiding the area?
- fhub 3y agoNote sure. Each Roadrunner is "Low six figures" and claims to be completely reusable if it doesn't hit it's target. Since you only need them over a certain area, they can move from ship to ship so you wouldn't need say a dozen per ship. But maybe 200 total. I'm more curious if it is technically feasible for something like that to take out a missile traveling at 300m/s.
- solarpunk 3y agoaping john gilmore a bit here: global supply chain interprets blockade as damage and routes around it.
- trhway 3y agowell, at $300K a pop, it may make sense to lease a Skynex (4-5 containers - control room, radar, 1-2 Oerlikon guns and a container with missiles) and load it on a container ship before the ship would enter the Houthi's attack zone. Unload after it makes through the zone and load on another ship, etc. If I were in private military contracting, I'd right now be making a killing so to speak. In general, with drones proliferating, an affordable highly mobile (all in one container - radar, minimum 20mm gun, laser, vertical launch Stinger class missiles and EM countermeasures) point defense should become a pretty good selling product.
- supertrope 3y agoThe vast majority of carriers will not carry weapons on their ships. Either they don’t want to deal with workers’ compensation when security personnel are hurt, their insurance doesn’t allow it, or the endpoint countries prohibit armed crew members so they’d have to get off in international waters. Even if you hire a PMC I doubt they can deal with anti-ship missiles or ballistic missiles. Attack is much easier than defense.
- trhway 3y agoBack at the time of Somali pirates the armed PMC were present on the board of many of those ships while passing off the Somali. Yes, they usually were there only while in international waters. For a PMC in the current situation, to avoid loading/unloading, it may make sense to get an own ship and load Skynex or similar system on it and to just escort the client ship though the danger zone. >Even if you hire a PMC I doubt they can deal with anti-ship missiles or ballistic missiles. Attack is much easier than defense. A subsonic missile like a typical anti-ship can easily be shot down by a regular MANPAD like Stinger. Automatic - just press a button - systems like Phalanx or Skynex are similarly very easy to operate. Ballistic missiles are the hardest target, so not every system can do it, yet the modern systems which are capable to shot down ballistics do it automatically.
- mschuster91 3y agoThe funniest thing to all of this is just who is complaining... guess what, many shipping companies are now finding out that "flags of convenience" also have a downside. When a ship bearing an US flag gets attacked, well, the US government will answer, or at least it can be expected to. But why should the US government intervene for a ship that's flying the flag of Panama or Liberia? (Obviously it's still in the US' best interest to intervene nevertheless because no country on this rock is as dependent on free, worldwide flow of goods than the US, but still, they don't have to)
- EasyMark 3y ago[dead]
- drawkward 3y agoThis title seems to need to be fixed
- braza 3y agoI do not have any horse in this race, but it’s quite surprising for me that USA is jumping in and Europe and China are not championing the operations for the security in the Red See even having more vested interests on the transportation.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoThat's easy to explain. Europe simply can't, and China has absolutely nothing to gain from getting itself entangled in the Middle Eastern mess. Because whatever it would do it would anger somebody there.
- grenouille932 3y agoChina is winning by having its ships still go through, after they have clarified with Houthis they will not work with Israeli ports.
- remarkEon 3y agoIt's in China's best interests to have USN stretched across multiple theaters (three - SCS, the Eastern Med, Persian Gulf/Red Sea) for reasons that should be obvious. Counting the containers' points of origin would make one think China would like to see this wrapped up quickly, but they think on longer timelines than quarterly earnings reports. "Europe" doesn't have a Navy capable of projecting enough force to deal with the problem. And, lastly, the raison d'être for today's USN is securing the free flow of global trade. So, it's very much unsurprising that USA is jumping in here (that we do not get paid for doing this service is a different matter).
- jcbrand 3y agoThe US gets paid by the "exorbitant privilege" of having the global reserve currency. That was the deal since the second world war.
- entropicgravity 3y agoSo that should be enough motivation for business to gently encourage the Houthis to reconsider this kind of livelihood.
- paulryanrogers 3y agoDoesn't their livelihood depend on impressing their benefactors with ever more successful attacks?
- elromulous 3y agoCan someone explain how this is still on going? This affects most countries on the planet, and only a handful stand to gain from it. I would think this would be solvable with even just the threat of military intervention.
- fwfef 3y ago[flagged]
- edanm 3y ago> the terrorist fake state "Israel". This is pretty combative language. Real people live in your so-called "fake state" and are on Hacker News. Even if you think you are 100% correct in your analysis of what is happening in Israel/Gaza right now (I disagree, but that's not the point), I think you should reevaluate using language like this on Hacker News, this is not the place for it and you will likely be downvoted.
- PeterStuer 3y agoEverything old is new again. My father was a seafarer 50 years ago, and back then they also had to take the long route around the cape because of instability in the Suez region.
- abdellah123 3y agoThis is very good news. Governments and companies now have an incentive to stop the Genocide in Gaza. 1% of Gaza population died in 3 months. At this rate, it will take less 25 years to finish them all. And this is in the most optimistic sense ... Hospitals are destroyed, no access to food and water and houses are destroyed ... They could finish their job in 10 years For comparison, Russian aggression on Ukraine lasted almost 2 years now. If Israel continues its genocide for "just" 2 years, this means killing 10% of the population.
- EasyMark 3y ago[dead]
- EasyMark 3y ago[dead]
- TimJRobinson 3y agoCaspian Report, a geopolitical YouTube channel that goes into depth on the background and context for events like this, did a great overview of the situation: https://youtu.be/T53qWE4Grck?si=PjYO7ObqeZ9YvNsY https://youtu.be/T53qWE4Grck?si=PjYO7ObqeZ9YvNsY