5 ms·

There have been several incidents of underwater sabotage in recent years, and I can't recall any previous action being taken, so this is a welcome change.

by biofox 2y ago

the_duke 2y ago
In the most recent incident the ship was also detained, forgot which country it was.
- SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
  Finland, in December > Russia-linked dark fleet tanker Eagle S, seized by Finland on December 25 2024 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42524174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42524174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42516864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42516864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42520563 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42520563
- piva00 2y ago
  Finland seized the Eagle S in late December.
ddtaylor 2y ago
Is this just a case where they can string along and claim lack of proof or do they claim it was just an accident etc? Which government is failing to uphold their property rights basically?
- lupusreal 2y ago
  The ships owner / crew will of course claim it was an accident, but Sweden is investigating it as a crime. That investigation hasn't run its course yet.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
    It could be both? If I am driving my car, and I hit a person due to not paying attention, isn't that both an accident and a crime. I am not saying that it is an accident; personally I very much doubt it. But they're not exclusive. You don't have to rule out "accident" before you investigate "crime".
    - lupusreal 2y ago
      This is the fourth incident in a short period of time, so it being a deliberate act of sabotage is very likely. However it may have been done by a small number of crew, maybe just one guy, paid to do it while the rest were oblivious.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
        > so it being a deliberate act of sabotage is very likely. I agree, that's why I very much doubt that they're really accidents. Isn't the captain responsible for the ship regardless of what they intended or what they personally knew?
        lupusreal 2y ago
        More or less, yeah. The ship itself could be forfeit even though the owners probably knew nothing of this.
Lio 2y ago
The UK just used a nuclear-powered sub to escort a Russian spy ship out of its waters and away from undersea infrastructure: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjv7qgpw28o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjv7qgpw28o
- pjc50 2y ago
  UK QRA forces have to deal with a lot of Russian aircraft, e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raf-jets-intercept-21-russian-aircraft-near-nato-airspace https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raf-jets-intercept-21-rus... (2023)
  - Aromasin 2y ago
    I spent some time in Lossiemouth as an engineering officer in the RAF. There was a period during the start of the Crimea War (2014/15~) when Russian fighter aircraft were circling the edges of our airspace almost every day for months on end - it's been going on for over a decade now if not longer. Russia and the UK have a much deeper adversarial relationship than any other European nation outside of the ex-Soviet states. This is in part due to the complex relationship between Russian oligarchs and London (it's often considered a haven for them from the Putin regime), and the active resistance the UK intelligence service puts up to Russian interference in the West. We're seeing that play out again in the substantial support that's been provided by the UK since the start of the full invasion of Ukraine.
- rasz 2y ago
  Hey, see this spy ship loaded to the brim with sensors? I want you to surface Nuclear Sub real close and let them take some good readings.
  - detritus 2y ago
    > this spy ship loaded to the brim with sensors? And yet they still didn't see them. I suspect HM Naval Service knows what it's upto and what its limits are.
amelius 2y ago
But I suspect you cannot win this war like that, because fixing a cable is more expensive than sacrificing a vessel.
- ctippett 2y ago
  I'd love some references to back this claim up. I have no idea what it costs to fix an undersea cable, but ships can go for many millions. It's a different class of vessel than I expect is used in these types of incidents, but I recently read an article about the Coast Guard's purchase of a $125m icebreaker[1]. [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/aiviq-icebreaker-military-coast-guard https://www.propublica.org/article/aiviq-icebreaker-military...
  - amelius 2y ago
    I suppose you'd use __old__ vessels for this purpose. Ones you'd bring to the ship-scrapyard anyway.
    - kdmtctl 2y ago
      Still hurts. They are not owned by the state, this is not how it works. Someone was granted to buy and operate them, and possibly promised to keep the vessels later. Even for scraping. So, still a loss. Edited: grammar.
  - tim333 2y ago
    > estimated costs ranging from $7 to $12 million per cable https://www.perplexity.ai/page/baltic-sea-cable-sabotage-ZPHHtKJkQQuT_t3DykHcsA https://www.perplexity.ai/page/baltic-sea-cable-sabotage-ZPH...

There have been several incidents of underwater sabotage in recent years, and I can't recall any previous action being taken, so this is a welcome change.

by biofox 2y ago

There have been several incidents of underwater sabotage in recent years, and I can't recall any previous action being taken, so this is a welcome change.

the_duke 2y ago

In the most recent incident the ship was also detained, forgot which country it was.

SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
Finland, in December > Russia-linked dark fleet tanker Eagle S, seized by Finland on December 25 2024 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42524174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42524174 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42516864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42516864 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42520563 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42520563
piva00 2y ago
Finland seized the Eagle S in late December.

ddtaylor 2y ago

Is this just a case where they can string along and claim lack of proof or do they claim it was just an accident etc? Which government is failing to uphold their property rights basically?

lupusreal 2y ago
The ships owner / crew will of course claim it was an accident, but Sweden is investigating it as a crime. That investigation hasn't run its course yet.
- SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
  It could be both? If I am driving my car, and I hit a person due to not paying attention, isn't that both an accident and a crime. I am not saying that it is an accident; personally I very much doubt it. But they're not exclusive. You don't have to rule out "accident" before you investigate "crime".
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    This is the fourth incident in a short period of time, so it being a deliberate act of sabotage is very likely. However it may have been done by a small number of crew, maybe just one guy, paid to do it while the rest were oblivious.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 2y ago
      > so it being a deliberate act of sabotage is very likely. I agree, that's why I very much doubt that they're really accidents. Isn't the captain responsible for the ship regardless of what they intended or what they personally knew?
      - lupusreal 2y ago
        More or less, yeah. The ship itself could be forfeit even though the owners probably knew nothing of this.

Lio 2y ago

The UK just used a nuclear-powered sub to escort a Russian spy ship out of its waters and away from undersea infrastructure: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjv7qgpw28o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqjv7qgpw28o

pjc50 2y ago
UK QRA forces have to deal with a lot of Russian aircraft, e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raf-jets-intercept-21-russian-aircraft-near-nato-airspace https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raf-jets-intercept-21-rus... (2023)
- Aromasin 2y ago
  I spent some time in Lossiemouth as an engineering officer in the RAF. There was a period during the start of the Crimea War (2014/15~) when Russian fighter aircraft were circling the edges of our airspace almost every day for months on end - it's been going on for over a decade now if not longer. Russia and the UK have a much deeper adversarial relationship than any other European nation outside of the ex-Soviet states. This is in part due to the complex relationship between Russian oligarchs and London (it's often considered a haven for them from the Putin regime), and the active resistance the UK intelligence service puts up to Russian interference in the West. We're seeing that play out again in the substantial support that's been provided by the UK since the start of the full invasion of Ukraine.
rasz 2y ago
Hey, see this spy ship loaded to the brim with sensors? I want you to surface Nuclear Sub real close and let them take some good readings.
- detritus 2y ago
  > this spy ship loaded to the brim with sensors? And yet they still didn't see them. I suspect HM Naval Service knows what it's upto and what its limits are.

amelius 2y ago

But I suspect you cannot win this war like that, because fixing a cable is more expensive than sacrificing a vessel.

ctippett 2y ago
I'd love some references to back this claim up. I have no idea what it costs to fix an undersea cable, but ships can go for many millions. It's a different class of vessel than I expect is used in these types of incidents, but I recently read an article about the Coast Guard's purchase of a $125m icebreaker[1]. [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/aiviq-icebreaker-military-coast-guard https://www.propublica.org/article/aiviq-icebreaker-military...
- amelius 2y ago
  I suppose you'd use __old__ vessels for this purpose. Ones you'd bring to the ship-scrapyard anyway.
  - kdmtctl 2y ago
    Still hurts. They are not owned by the state, this is not how it works. Someone was granted to buy and operate them, and possibly promised to keep the vessels later. Even for scraping. So, still a loss. Edited: grammar.
- tim333 2y ago
  > estimated costs ranging from $7 to $12 million per cable https://www.perplexity.ai/page/baltic-sea-cable-sabotage-ZPHHtKJkQQuT_t3DykHcsA https://www.perplexity.ai/page/baltic-sea-cable-sabotage-ZPH...