Coast Guard Intervention information needed for a novel.

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by maijipo

Thank you. Very useful and serve the story greatly.

One quick on-topic sea story I remembered after reading your post. I was standing duty one day at the command center for a big chunk of the East Coast. Somehow a woman had gotten ahold of our number and called to inform us the that Queen Mary had been hijacked and was being kept off New Orleans. Apparently a man she didn't know had called her up as some kind of confidence scam and she was supposed to wire money to an account somewhere to free them all. We did our due diligence and checked via AIS that the Queen Mary 2, which she was presumably referring to since the Queen Mary is a museum in Long Beach, was somewhere mid-Atlantic as you would expect her to be. We worked our hardest to assure the woman that no, terrorists didn't manage to hijack an 1100' ocean liner, move it thousands of miles over many days, and she was the only one who knew about it. But she was having none of it, I'm sure to this day she's cursing the idiot Coast Guard who wouldn't believe her, while sure that the $5,000 she wired to some dude in Nigeria saved the day for 3,000 passengers and crew. Crazy how some folks loose all credulity when it comes to scammers but are over suspicious of professionals who actually do this for a living (and she called us!), but it's remarkably common. Hence the seeming lack of seriousness given to uncorrelated reports.

[Pelican_38]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

For the OP, there really isn't a standard procedure for the situation you described. The CG gets well meaning but ultimately crackpot calls by the hundreds, so the original call would need to have some credible reason for requesting a check on the suspected vessel or a way to make the person on duty feel they needed to at least check it out. Unless you had something pretty credible to launch a law enforcement call-out they would probably just send a small boat from the nearest small boat station to do a drive-by and check it out. They may or may not be armed depending if they were already doing boardings or not. If and only if a helicopter or airplane was already in the air and close they may ask them to fly over for a quick reality check, they certainly wouldn't launch us for that. They would almost certainly not do a full-on SWAT style assault on the boat, what little capability the CG has for that kind of thing is restricted to a few teams at major ports and were set up post 9-11 for response to a 9-11 level incident. They may also very well call local law enforcement, every county, city, and state agency with any nexus to the water in FL has an RHI and some gung ho troopers, chances are one of them would be closer and better equipped for the potential law enforcement action than the CG. Sorry if that's not terribly exciting, but basically that's such an unusual scenario that is far more likely to be someone with an overactive imagination, keeping in mind we deal with a lot of overactive imaginations, that we most probably wouldn't take it very seriously.

This is a pretty plausible explanation. That writer appears to have credible knowledge.

I would add that there are always assets that COULD be available to divert to this. If the initial report sounded credible, LEO would divert any asset on a lower priority mission to confirm any details the caller provided and if it still appeared credible, they would keep eyes on the target while they stood up an Incident Response Team (everyone calls it a different name - but it's basically an inter agency group to command and control a hostage situation). The IRT would determine what assets are required and what are available. The first guys on the scene would probably not make contact and would simply try to determine if it was a legitimate hostage situation, the scope of the situation, and all the tactical information they can gather. If it looked like it was a no-kidding hostage situation, they will get a hasty assault team as quickly as possible with an emergency assault plan in place. Those assets are likely made up of any available units and could be formed around the team that made the initial assessment. For something like a boat, a hasty assault would be ugly and you pray you don't have to resort to that. Also, since you objective is mobile (a boat), they would take steps to ensure they could stop if from leaving (or allow it to leave and stop it at a more desirable area).

If it is a no-kidding hostage situation, they will start assembling a deliberate assault plan. If the area has enough risk (i.e. near a big city or a major coast guard station), this may be made up of dedicated and specially trained folks, or they might have to assemble the team from normal patrol officers who have some additional training.

Also, USCG might get the call, but they will have standing agreements with other local law enforcement agencies that might dictate another agency provide the response. The USCG PAO might provide you some information on the specific offices involved. They should be anxious to get good info out and if you are a credible writer, you may receive some cooperation.

Don't count on people from the internet to give you much help - me included (actually, me especially). BTW - I retired from US Special Forces in mid-2000, so my information is dated. I have worked with several large city and state LEO to help train SWAT teams - but I've never worked in an area with overlapping jurisdictions like this situation. But my first thought is USCG would not be the lead agency in the situation you described.

[Wallaby]

Having called the Coastguard to report a possible incident involving a smoke trail and an extremely loud boom about 50-60 miles offshore, I can report the following:


I was stunned at the clarity of the VHF radio, and that they even heard me with a masthead antenna 65ft up. After the initial call on 16, I was 'moved' to 22-Alpha and told to stay there.

I gave details of the smoke pattern and the very high altitude. The nature of the boom, and timing. The disappearance of the smoke prior to the boom. Approximate location, etc. When asked if it might have been a sonic boom, I could not be sure. There was no visible explosion (about 10 miles away).
Then, my very worried crew, a pilot btw, gave her version (virtually identical).
I asked if I should divert in that direction and was told not to.


The CG contacted me some 10-15 minutes later to report no missing military/commercial/private flights. They checked a few details.
Shortly, a CG helicopter raced over head. They checked I was the reporting party and ascertained approximate location, and went that a-way.
A plane also circled over the approximate location for some time.


The point is, the CG took this report very seriously. Before they 'let' me leave 22A, I asked if they had any idea what had happened. My initial report was confirmed by two other vessels--phew. FYI, there was no wreckage and no missing planes, and no military planes in the area.



I suspect the smoke trail was a private jet 'fighter' doing acrobatics. Then, from a very high altitude, it went into a dive and broke the sound barrier before it pulled out.

[jmorrison146]

Originally Posted by Dan Mosby

Not if you've ever served in the military. They pass out "propaganda" points to the troops in case they ever get interviewed by media. Have been for years, too.



That's why you never hear the truth about things like, "the A-stan war", or "women in the miltary" from anyone other than designated propaga....er, "leaders". Meanwhile, young men around the globe are having to work twice as hard to carry the kit and do the work that women CAN'T do, or won't do....while getting maimed and killed in the process on some occasions.

Not in the US Coast Guard. And women have, for the last 30 years and into the future, have pulled their weight and have excellent opportunities to serve in senior leadership positions including commands afloat and ashore.

Grind your axe wherever you want but try to know what you're taking about.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by jmorrison146

Not in the US Coast Guard. And women have, for the last 30 years and into the future, have pulled their weight and have excellent opportunities to serve in senior leadership positions including commands afloat and ashore.

Grind your axe wherever you want but try to know what you're taking about.

Well said. These folks have a difficult, dangerous and valuable job to do which no one should diminish with such uninformed nonsense.

[Pelican_38]

Originally Posted by Dan Mosby

Same as any other federal branch of government. Their job is to LIE to save face. Period.

I will ignore the unwarranted personal attacks,

Dear Sir, please believe me when I say any personal attacks are quite warranted!

Have a nice afternoon!

[jmorrison146]

OP -
Research MSST 91114 based in Miami

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mari..._Security_Team

And TACLET South based at Ops Locka.

https://www.atlanticarea.uscg.mil/Ou...-Units/TACLET/

Photos and videos of these units will give you info on how,they are equipped.

My guess is one of these units would support the FBI or local Sheriff who would take the lead on a potential hostage situation. Coasties don't have a while lot of expertise in hostage situations so,they would likely defer to,and support those that do. The CO or PAO at either command should be able to,answer that question.

Should these units be deployed, the closest USCG Station will have armed boats and boarding officers. They could also,support the "lead agency", whoever that might be.

USCG Sector St. Petersburg has responsibility for that geographic area but I'm not sure what the nearest Station would be. The Sector has sever 87' patrol boats that might be operating nearby in your scenario.

https://www.atlanticarea.uscg.mil/Ou.../Sector-Units/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mari...ss_patrol_boat.

I strongly suggest that you make an appointment with the Officer in Charge of the nearest USCG Station to you, ask for 30 minutes of his or her time, and they will probably give you what you need. Consider having the discussion over a nice lunch.

Regardless of,what Mr. Mosby says, none of these people will lie to you.

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by maijipo

Good morning.

I wrote a novel (sailing novel) happening in the west coast of Florida. I am in the correction phase and I am a bit unhappy about the realism of one the scene.

The situation is the following. The crew of a catamaran is suspected to be taken hostage and one other boat suspecting a problem called the coast guard to report the fact. The boat reporting the indident via the VHF is not 100% sure of the fact.

The Catamaran is located East of Gulivan Bay (Thousand Islands Florida) anchored in the mangrove.

How will the Coast Guard proceed in such case? Would they send a helicopter? A boat? From where will come the boat or the helicopter? In how much time would they be on site? That is my first set of doubts.

Secondly, once on site what is the standard procedure? I assume they will try to board the catamaran. What type of gear equipment’s would they wear?

I would appreciate any information you can give on that topic. I would like to be as realistic as possible.

I sail these waters since the last two years, and I realize that I really don’t have much idea how the Coast Guard operate in the area and what they have their disposition.

Thank you in advance!

C.

I doubt they would try to board until they established contact and then brought in a hostage negotiator

If they did try to board in that situation, it's difficult to say exactly which weapons they'd bring.

They have the M4 rifle, 9mm hand gun, and shotguns available. Plus the M240 Machine gun which could be used in support

The way the navy handled a hostage situation involving Somali Pirates that failed to board a tanker and settled on a sailboat circumnavigating instead is detailed in a book written recently.

It was based on a true story and is called The Tears of Dark Waters by Corban Addison. I found it very interesting.

https://www.amazon.com/Tears-Dark-Wa.../dp/0718042395

[Montanan]

I'm imagining that it would go down something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFMPOX3ajjQ

Well at least it would make for an interesting read.

[Montanan]

Or perhaps with less gun play but more evasive maneuvering / manoeuvering like how such goes down in Sweden:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3nka4bToW4

[Brewgyver]

Originally Posted by maijipo

Good morning.
(snippage)
The situation is the following. The crew of a catamaran is suspected to be taken hostage and one other boat suspecting a problem called the coast guard to report the fact. The boat reporting the indident via the VHF is not 100% sure of the fact.

For your scenario, I would suggest that if I were the boat reporting the suspicious incident, I wouldn't do it via VHF. The kidnappers/hijackers/pirates/terrorists would have to be assumed to have the radio on (and in scan mode) listening for just such radio traffic. In fact, they'd likely all have handhelds, with earpieces, monitoring the marine channels before they even approach the boat.

I'm certain the CG and other LE agencies would take such a report very seriously. Can you imagine what kind of damage could be done with a large pleasure vessel loaded with even low grade explosives could do?
(think OKC, Ryder truck, fertilizer and diesel)

The ten terrorists (coward puppets) who perpetrated the 2008 Mumbai attacks first seized an Indian fishing boat, and used it to get into Mumbai coastal waters.

[Dockhead]

Good research is the backbone of a good novel which involves this kind of action described in detail.


I remember picking up a spy novel highly praised by some friends of mine. It was set in Moscow in the 1930's. I threw it away after a few pages. After the protagonist got out of his Pobeda car.


Pobeda meaning "victory". A car produced after the war. Big Facepalm. Double Facepalm. Why bother with the names of the cars if you haven't even figured out what decade they were produced in? Totally broke the spell; I threw it away in disgust.

[roverhi]

Unless there was a confirmed need doubt they'd send a Helo. They are expensive to fly and continuing maintenance based on flt. hours so they aren't going to waste available flt. hours unless there is a training budget. Depending on how far away the CG station is would be a factor. The CG flies C-130s, the Navy P3s. Doubt the P3s normally fly with depth charges in peace time.

If there is a Sheriff or Municipal Police Boat available bet they would pass it along to them if they are more than a few miles away from the site.

[hamburking]

The hostage takers, aboard the catamaran, would hear the VHF radio call. Remember, anyone within range can hear a VHF call. After hearing the VHF call, the hostage takers would then hail the CG on VHF themselves. They would explain that there is no problem, the vessel is safe, and all is well.

From what I understand, the CG rescues vessels in distress, and sometimes checks the dates on your flares or counts your lifejackets. In my area, they seldom, if ever, bother sailboats. They focus their attention on powerboats going fast/stupid, and looking for drunk drivers.

If the good samaritans really wanted to get the attention of the coast guard, they should call a MAYDAY and give the coords and vessel description of the suspected vessel (instead of their own).

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by Dan Mosby

Same as any other federal branch of government. Their job is to LIE to save face. Period. See: homosexuals in service, females in service, training standards, poor equipment forced into service, any other number of issues senior leaders want to hide from the public.

Here's a couple examples of when a public affairs officer would be directed to spin a story, or outright fabricate information to give to the public:

https://www.courant.com/news/connect...205-story.html

The Loss Of The Morning Dew - Seaworthy Magazine - BoatUS

There were a lot of "it's under investigation...." statements being made during those incidents, along with outright fabrication that I won't go into.

I will ignore the unwarranted personal attacks, as I understand truth is painful to some, though I can't understand why. Lying to save face and decieve the public is not something I created or approve of, and yet it exists at every level of government. Instead of attacking people that have the courage to address such issues, you should attack those responsible for the deceit, and those that defend the practice. Unless you approve of deception, of course. I do not.

Such deceptions should, indeed, be considered for inclusion in any book, and would certainly add to and highlight the realism of the situation and engross the reader.

I'm sorry, I missed what service you were in and what you did again?

Retired Coast Guard helicopter pilot here. It's clear that you did not serve in the Coast Guard and know next to nothing about the service and clearly nothing about the service's culture. That's not a personal attack, unlike your unsupported accusation that I and all those I served with fabricate information provided to the public as part of our daily job, which most certainly is a personal attack. It's simply the truth. It baffles me what you hope to accomplish by coming here and launching such attacks apparently in service of some personal political agenda? You certainly haven't won a single heart or mind and never will with that approach.

It is interesting that you bring up the Morning Dew mishap. Interesting both because the best example you could find was something that happened so long ago that it's a case study I had to go through when first qualifying as a pilot (I'm retired!). And because it is indeed a case study that everyone in the search and rescue part of the Coast Guard is required to study when first starting our careers and refers to often throughout their career as a case of what we want to make sure we DON'T ever do again. That's the part about service culture that you could never know, getting your information second or third hand, and why it's so frustrating to have you defaming a whole organization when you clearly know nothing about it. Every organization makes mistakes and there's 3 sides to every story, reading about 2 such mistakes or possible mistakes and coming to your set of conclusion is simply unwarranted. And what homosexuals or women in the Coast Guard have to do with anything other then some serious personal issues on your part I have no idea! Again, you're personally attacking my shipmates who served honorably and with great courage...you have absolutely zero right to do that.

You've clearly got a massive chip on your shoulder with a pretty big dose of tin hat conspiracy theorist backed up by what appears to be nothing in the way of firsthand knowledge. Please, think about what you accomplish by airing that on a forum for cruising? And please, don't ever again insult me and those who served with my by stating that YOU are the one with courage for spraying your crap on an online message board. You have no idea.