@frankrenda2519 the punk that is destroying his own country and killing his own people sending them to war whilst cowardly hiding somewhere. Seems he has Russian lives in his hands to me.
Britain has to be more confrontational. If law alows you impound the ship, if they are operating in a war-like manner, then respond as if it is an act of war.
If it's in uk territorial waters, and known to be acting with hostile intent, why not impound the offending vessel like the Finish government recently did?
and they could shoot down your spy satellites in retaliation. Spying is done by all sides. If you escalate recklessly you will get more than you bargained for.
All the undersea pipelines and cables are already mapped and available on maritime charts, just so ships don't anchor over them by accident. So no, they're not mapping.
In the Baltic Sea, the territorial waters limit is often below 12 nautical miles and the rule of "Free Passage" applies. But that doesn't mean that these waters are "lawless" does it? Poorly maintained, unseaworthy tankers that drags an anker across the sea bed is clearly a risk to the naboring countries and a threat to the common waters. "Free passage" or not it is hard to believe that these ships can not be stopped.
@robertelbrnd2003 free passage is not the same as loitering at 5mph . Free passage is normally done at about 20mph . Turning off the ais is a clear sign of shady activities by that vessel.
I spotted Yantar (the vessel in the video) on the AIS a couple of days ago between Sweden and Denmark. Just in-between they shut off the AIS. After plotting a course, I guess they shut it off and changed course for some "research". There are four words for "lies" in Russia. One of those means "you obviously lie, but it can't be proved".
There are national waters and economic waters where the rights of nations are extended. But the rest? Old, worn-out and poorly maintained tankers are clearly a danger to the common waters. Can this irresponsible behavior not be dealt with? Are there no internationally applicable laws for international waters and who can enforce them?
@@KirsiVackelinThere are both kinds of infrastructure on the bottom of the sea that have fallen victim to anchors recently. The Balticconnector gas pipeline was damaged by an anchor a little over a year ago. It is a valuable asset for Finnish energy security. It was repaired not that long ago and was about to be run over again by the anchor chain of Eagle S this christmas had the authorities not intervened before the pipeline was reached. Another such "near miss" that was averted was the Estlink 1 power cable that was also on the course by the way. Had it been damaged both Estlink cables would have been out of action.
@@herptek The person said 'pipeline' when he was talking about a cable. I could try to find that point in the video but it's no use. And BTW I am like 20 kilometers away from the place where the sabotage took place. So maybe I know things already, being a non-mucking-about Finn. Edit: the 'tanker' is at 17 minutes 26 seconds. Edit 2: the 'energy pipeline' (it was not a gas pipe or oil pipe but an electric cable) at 19 minutes 7 seconds.
@@KirsiVackelinThe place the ship was seized at is not very far from me either, but hardly does that matter for this discussion, does it? Many people live near the coast. They obviously meant to say "anchor" in place of "tanker" in that sentence that you are correcting. It is so obvious a slip of words from him that everyone can understand what he must have meant instead given the context. Or if not, what exactly would that sentence mean otherwise? That comes across to me as nitpicking because clearly everyone knows what he meant. The other point is more interesting because it actually indicates some confusion on their part about what is what and why it is currently relevant. I was about to actually mention that, but thought it better not to dwell on details when the conclusion was basically right anyway. It seems that they have gotten the impression that the Baltic states are reducing their dependence on Russian gas and therefore needed the pipeline, by which they must have referred to the aforementioned Balticconnector, that had indeed been damaged already once before as I'm sure you know and that was about to become a repeat victim this christmas, as you may or may not know. But that pipeline, which is two directional, is more important for Finnish security of supply of energy than that of Estonia. What he must have had at the back of his mind is the Baltic countries project to decouple from the syncrhronized power grid in common with Russia and Belarus in the near future. Here the power cables Estlink 1 and 2 are more important for the energy security of Estonia than that of Finland because of this. It must have been what they were thinking of when going over that point. The higher capacity Estlink 2 power cable was taken out of service and the other one was likely about to. Trying to cut them both may well have been an attempt to hamper Baltic countries shifting away from dependence on the Russian electric grid.
@@KirsiVackelin The place the ship was seized at is not very far from me either, but hardly is that relevant for this topic, is it? The sentence you are correcting them for seems to be a pretty obvious slip of words on his part which is pretty easy to understand given the context. He obviously intented to say "anchor" in place of "tanker" as otherwise the sentence would have been nonsensical. I would think everyone understood what they were talking about. The other point was more interesting because it indeed does seem to indicate some confusion on their part on what is what or why it matters. I was actually about to mention that but thought it better not to dwell too much on details when the conclusion was basically right anyway. It seems to me that he had the impression that the Baltic countries are reducing dependence on Russian gas and therefore need the pipeline, by which he must mean the aforementioned Balticconnector, for their energy security. As you probably know the two directional pipeline had indeed been damaged by an anchor earlier and as you may or may not know was about to become a repeat victim this last christmas. That pipeline is more important for Finnish security of supply of energy than that of Estonia, however. What they must have had on the back of their minds when bringing up that point was probably the Baltic countries project to decouple from the syncrhronized power grid in common with Russia and Belarus in the near future. Trying to cut both Estlink 1 and 2 may have been an attempt to hamper the Baltic countries shift away from reliance on Russian electric infrastructure. The higher capacity Estlink 2 was taken out of action and the other one was probably about to as well.
Does the Royal Navy or the defense correspondent for The Times (or anyone else) imagine that, given the sort of equipment a vessel engaged in oceanic "research" should be expected to carry, the office of the watch on the Yantar was completely surprised and astounded when the Astute class attack submarine along side? Personally, I would be surprised if he were surprised. And I would like to remind our interviewer that while the air temperature may be quite low, the coldest water temperature in the Baltic Sea is 1 degree Celsius and there is no wind chill. So it is probably warmer in the water in a wet suit than on deck on a weather deck.
The international research community should set rules and define what qualifies as a research vessel. Mission statement and sailing plan etc. And if a country is expelled from the community, it would follow that there cannot be any scientific research made by them. Trolling (yes, that's dragging a bait or an anchor, nothing to do with hobgoblins) of underwater infrastructure does not qualify, nor does preparing for such.
Great idea but it assumes, that people follow international rules and standards. Recent incidents in the Baltic shows otherwise, I think. Plus the fact, that Russia or any other country would just come up with some exotic research, that must be done right above the oil infrastructure. But that is just coincidence.
two questions. 1. Is it not posable to ban ships from a country's waters if it is deemed to constitute a risk. 2 I had assumed that most communications, including the internet, were now via satellite.Is not the case?
Perhaps we should make the Baltic Sea an anchor free zone and in stead have anchor buoys outside the major harbors, that the ships can be anchored to. We can't have these "accidents" happening all the time. Civilian ships should not be allowed to carry "weapons of cable destruction". Boarding the ships of the "shadow fleet" and simply taking their anchor would be the least agressive way to solve the problem. As they are not sailing under russian flag, Russia has no say in this "violation of the principle of free passage". If San Marino, Guyana, Sierra Leone, Comoro Islands or Guinea Bissau wants to declare war on NATO over this - let them.
Really? Remind us how much of Project Fear was wrong about Brexit, or Ukraine? If facts make you uncomfortable, that’s more a “you” problem. One might be accidental, two is suspicious, three, four, five, all causing damage to national infrastructure and you’re naive if you think it’s not connected. But let’s give you the benefit of the doubt: such vessels are so unseaworthy they ought to be impounded for their own good.
As mere mortals we often reflect on the fact that it is never too late to build a new dream. I am not sure whether the Kremlin ever opines along these lines❤️🇬🇧🙏 The story of the rat is less inspiring ☺️
The quality of comment was good but the format was truncated to the point of being irksome as opposed to mood setting. Don't mind the effort to heighten the drama but you might have to take care not to set yourselves up as a dramatic production instead of an informative piece of journalism.
There is a big difference between a research vessel 'Yantar' hanging around UK and then Nato with Mossad cooperation in the sinking the russian cargo ship 'Ursa Major' in the Mediterrean with the loss of two lives - a big difference - no wonder Healy is so nervous
@@fredrikh9299 You're absolutely right. Channel: *Russian Media Monitor* Video: *State TV accuses America of sinking Russian cargo ship Ursa Major* If I remember correctly, Russian state media made that claim even before the _Yantar_ (the same vessel as in the UK incident) had visited the wreck. Edit: Just to confirm the State TV report was *prior* to any Russian investigation of the wreck: The video referenced above (from Russian state TV) is dated as "One month ago" A video reporting the _Yantar_ to be investigated the wreck is dated "12 days ago" Channel: *H I Sutton* Video: *Unique Deep Sea Spy Ship Yantar Now Diving On Wreck Of Russian Ship In Med* Thus, Russian State Media pre-empted any possible Russian investigation.
Healy wasn't nervous. If you look at a longer extract of his Commons statement, you'll see he was perfectly relaxed, cracking a joke beforehand. Channel: *Times Radio* Video: *Putin’s spy ship spotted in British waters, defence minister reveals*
Is that you Putin? 😂 Lots of interesting marine life of interest for Russia in English economical water? You should have invited the British navy when they popped up to say hello. Don't be shy to share the life of plankton. 😂
The world sure is putting up with a lot from this little punk.
the punk that holds your life in his hands .
@frankrenda2519
😆😂🤣
@frankrenda2519 the punk that is destroying his own country and killing his own people sending them to war whilst cowardly hiding somewhere. Seems he has Russian lives in his hands to me.
@@frankrenda2519 Putin is a punk. He can't do anything. He's an impotent, short little goon who won't be around much longer.
@frankrenda2519 Putin is the most miserable person in the world.
Britain has to be more confrontational. If law alows you impound the ship, if they are operating in a war-like manner, then respond as if it is an act of war.
If it's in uk territorial waters, and known to be acting with hostile intent, why not impound the offending vessel like the Finish government recently did?
12 miles only
and they could shoot down your spy satellites in retaliation. Spying is done by all sides. If you escalate recklessly you will get more than you bargained for.
actually it was in Finish waters, only just
😅😅😅what do you mean only 😅@@petergilbert72
Decades too late. Where was the media when people were warning this was coming.
A very informative report .. thanks
Cables cut for the fourth time Gotland to Latvia cable , Swedish coast guard seized vessel MV Vezhen ,out of Ust-Luga.Russia .
It's mapping the infrastructure of UK , Europe and Ireland. They can then disarm us without much warfare but by simply cutting cables.
Spot on! I suspect them to be digitally mapping Britain. Maybe sonar? Who knows... I’m glad I seen your comment. My thoughts exactly!
All the undersea pipelines and cables are already mapped and available on maritime charts, just so ships don't anchor over them by accident. So no, they're not mapping.
Ireland frightened them off so they had to pick on the UK 😂
Mr. Stubb is President of Finland, not Prime Minister.
Yeah, sloppy reporting.
Boat, meet Torpedo, Torpedo, meet boat.
Nahh. Meet it on its own level of obfuscation. Boat meets research boat.
In the Baltic Sea, the territorial waters limit is often below 12 nautical miles and the rule of "Free Passage" applies. But that doesn't mean that these waters are "lawless" does it?
Poorly maintained, unseaworthy tankers that drags an anker across the sea bed is clearly a risk to the naboring countries and a threat to the common waters.
"Free passage" or not it is hard to believe that these ships can not be stopped.
Free passage for Russia means turning off the AIS and doing some "research".
@robertelbrnd2003 free passage is not the same as loitering at 5mph . Free passage is normally done at about 20mph . Turning off the ais is a clear sign of shady activities by that vessel.
@@tomhermens7698 I absolutely agree. That's why I was asking about what could be done. Are there not international laws that prohibit this?
I spotted Yantar (the vessel in the video) on the AIS a couple of days ago between Sweden and Denmark. Just in-between they shut off the AIS. After plotting a course, I guess they shut it off and changed course for some "research". There are four words for "lies" in Russia. One of those means "you obviously lie, but it can't be proved".
Great coverage!
Can't it kind of subside and settle on the sea bed? Instead of floating?
There are national waters and economic waters where the rights of nations are extended. But the rest?
Old, worn-out and poorly maintained tankers are clearly a danger to the common waters.
Can this irresponsible behavior not be dealt with?
Are there no internationally applicable laws for international waters and who can enforce them?
Drop your anchor, not your tanker. And Stubb is the president, not the prime minister of FI.
Plus, a cable is not a 'pipeline'. Pipe is something hollow through which something flows.
@@KirsiVackelinThere are both kinds of infrastructure on the bottom of the sea that have fallen victim to anchors recently. The Balticconnector gas pipeline was damaged by an anchor a little over a year ago. It is a valuable asset for Finnish energy security. It was repaired not that long ago and was about to be run over again by the anchor chain of Eagle S this christmas had the authorities not intervened before the pipeline was reached. Another such "near miss" that was averted was the Estlink 1 power cable that was also on the course by the way. Had it been damaged both Estlink cables would have been out of action.
@@herptek The person said 'pipeline' when he was talking about a cable. I could try to find that point in the video but it's no use. And BTW I am like 20 kilometers away from the place where the sabotage took place. So maybe I know things already, being a non-mucking-about Finn.
Edit: the 'tanker' is at 17 minutes 26 seconds.
Edit 2: the 'energy pipeline' (it was not a gas pipe or oil pipe but an electric cable) at 19 minutes 7 seconds.
@@KirsiVackelinThe place the ship was seized at is not very far from me either, but hardly does that matter for this discussion, does it? Many people live near the coast.
They obviously meant to say "anchor" in place of "tanker" in that sentence that you are correcting. It is so obvious a slip of words from him that everyone can understand what he must have meant instead given the context. Or if not, what exactly would that sentence mean otherwise? That comes across to me as nitpicking because clearly everyone knows what he meant.
The other point is more interesting because it actually indicates some confusion on their part about what is what and why it is currently relevant. I was about to actually mention that, but thought it better not to dwell on details when the conclusion was basically right anyway.
It seems that they have gotten the impression that the Baltic states are reducing their dependence on Russian gas and therefore needed the pipeline, by which they must have referred to the aforementioned Balticconnector, that had indeed been damaged already once before as I'm sure you know and that was about to become a repeat victim this christmas, as you may or may not know. But that pipeline, which is two directional, is more important for Finnish security of supply of energy than that of Estonia.
What he must have had at the back of his mind is the Baltic countries project to decouple from the syncrhronized power grid in common with Russia and Belarus in the near future. Here the power cables Estlink 1 and 2 are more important for the energy security of Estonia than that of Finland because of this. It must have been what they were thinking of when going over that point. The higher capacity Estlink 2 power cable was taken out of service and the other one was likely about to. Trying to cut them both may well have been an attempt to hamper Baltic countries shifting away from dependence on the Russian electric grid.
@@KirsiVackelin The place the ship was seized at is not very far from me either, but hardly is that relevant for this topic, is it?
The sentence you are correcting them for seems to be a pretty obvious slip of words on his part which is pretty easy to understand given the context. He obviously intented to say "anchor" in place of "tanker" as otherwise the sentence would have been nonsensical. I would think everyone understood what they were talking about.
The other point was more interesting because it indeed does seem to indicate some confusion on their part on what is what or why it matters. I was actually about to mention that but thought it better not to dwell too much on details when the conclusion was basically right anyway. It seems to me that he had the impression that the Baltic countries are reducing dependence on Russian gas and therefore need the pipeline, by which he must mean the aforementioned Balticconnector, for their energy security. As you probably know the two directional pipeline had indeed been damaged by an anchor earlier and as you may or may not know was about to become a repeat victim this last christmas. That pipeline is more important for Finnish security of supply of energy than that of Estonia, however.
What they must have had on the back of their minds when bringing up that point was probably the Baltic countries project to decouple from the syncrhronized power grid in common with Russia and Belarus in the near future. Trying to cut both Estlink 1 and 2 may have been an attempt to hamper the Baltic countries shift away from reliance on Russian electric infrastructure. The higher capacity Estlink 2 was taken out of action and the other one was probably about to as well.
Does the Royal Navy or the defense correspondent for The Times (or anyone else) imagine that, given the sort of equipment a vessel engaged in oceanic "research" should be expected to carry, the office of the watch on the Yantar was completely surprised and astounded when the Astute class attack submarine along side? Personally, I would be surprised if he were surprised.
And I would like to remind our interviewer that while the air temperature may be quite low, the coldest water temperature in the Baltic Sea is 1 degree Celsius and there is no wind chill. So it is probably warmer in the water in a wet suit than on deck on a weather deck.
All ships anchors should be locked in place in sensitive areas, with a no stopping or anchorage allowed by law. That would solve the dilemma.
Take the bloody gloves off mate. Turning the other check constantly is just for the story books. Teach them a lesson once and for all!!!!
The international research community should set rules and define what qualifies as a research vessel. Mission statement and sailing plan etc. And if a country is expelled from the community, it would follow that there cannot be any scientific research made by them. Trolling (yes, that's dragging a bait or an anchor, nothing to do with hobgoblins) of underwater infrastructure does not qualify, nor does preparing for such.
Great idea but it assumes, that people follow international rules and standards. Recent incidents in the Baltic shows otherwise, I think. Plus the fact, that Russia or any other country would just come up with some exotic research, that must be done right above the oil infrastructure. But that is just coincidence.
two questions. 1. Is it not posable to ban ships from a country's waters if it is deemed to constitute a risk. 2 I had assumed that most communications, including the internet, were now via satellite.Is not the case?
Territorial water 12 miles. Ship was at 45 miles. The real important info that they didn't provided. But you get scary music.
Perhaps we should make the Baltic Sea an anchor free zone and in stead have anchor buoys outside the major harbors, that the ships can be anchored to. We can't have these "accidents" happening all the time.
Civilian ships should not be allowed to carry "weapons of cable destruction".
Boarding the ships of the "shadow fleet" and simply taking their anchor would be the least agressive way to solve the problem. As they are not sailing under russian flag, Russia has no say in this "violation of the principle of free passage". If San Marino, Guyana, Sierra Leone, Comoro Islands or Guinea Bissau wants to declare war on NATO over this - let them.
If the Anchor was stuck on a submarine it might have been dragged down to Davey J’s Locker
Ireland and Britain are the front line on western Europe.
I believe this has happened again in the last few days but in Estonian waters.
And now we have Vezhen in Swedish water outside Karlskrona, taken the same way the Finns took Eagle S
slow deliberate warnings were there, Were people even listening? Remember Panama Papers.
The west truly has to do some studies on Russian psychology and history.
This happened off the irish cost & was escaped off by the irish naval service
What's with the asinine scary music?
What's with the dramatic music?
Cheap and tacky for sure.
The underwater war against north stream sabotage.?
" we see you" is a strong message .? Not in the Kremlin it aint .
Project Fear is alive and well over at Times Radio.
Really? Remind us how much of Project Fear was wrong about Brexit, or Ukraine? If facts make you uncomfortable, that’s more a “you” problem. One might be accidental, two is suspicious, three, four, five, all causing damage to national infrastructure and you’re naive if you think it’s not connected. But let’s give you the benefit of the doubt: such vessels are so unseaworthy they ought to be impounded for their own good.
As mere mortals we often reflect on the fact that it is never too late to build a new dream. I am not sure whether the Kremlin ever opines along these lines❤️🇬🇧🙏
The story of the rat is less inspiring ☺️
Remember the "Rainbow Warrior"
Interesting but it is difficult to see the connection.
@KirsiVackelin French government effectively dealt with a problem, and never acknowledged what was done.
Message to the Putin: “we are afraid, we can do nothing”👎
And it still works... incredible! Russians must think Europeans are ret@rded.
Putin is the single most scared person on the Earth.
Are you ppl nuts?? 'It may have been an accident'.... are you ppl nuts or what??? This is crazy!!
It's happening to often to be accidental
Accident? No way
Yes we're nuts thanks ❤. Our eyes aren't lying though.
If it happens once, it's by chance
If it happens twice, it's a coincidence
If it happens three times, it's enemy action.
If this a "research" ship, would not they be able to detect a submarine in their vicinity??😅
The quality of comment was good but the format was truncated to the point of being irksome as opposed to mood setting. Don't mind the effort to heighten the drama but you might have to take care not to set yourselves up as a dramatic production instead of an informative piece of journalism.
Long drawn out programme with no insights. Maybe suitable listening for someone who has no prior knowledge.
That to??
What to where?
Wow ....England realising, there dependent on other...
EUROPEAN countries...
will Amerika help?
Com-si Com-sa...
( Sweden )
England.....?
@@gammondinosaur3411 Never mind a Sovjet commenter who does not grasp that we are capable of defending ourselves. At, cough, many frontiers.
There is a big difference between a research vessel 'Yantar' hanging around UK and then Nato with Mossad cooperation in the sinking the russian cargo ship 'Ursa Major' in the Mediterrean with the loss of two lives - a big difference - no wonder Healy is so nervous
Reference for the sinking of Ursa major? Russian media?
@@fredrikh9299 You're absolutely right. Channel: *Russian Media Monitor* Video: *State TV accuses America of sinking Russian cargo ship Ursa Major*
If I remember correctly, Russian state media made that claim even before the _Yantar_ (the same vessel as in the UK incident) had visited the wreck.
Edit: Just to confirm the State TV report was *prior* to any Russian investigation of the wreck:
The video referenced above (from Russian state TV) is dated as "One month ago"
A video reporting the _Yantar_ to be investigated the wreck is dated "12 days ago"
Channel: *H I Sutton* Video: *Unique Deep Sea Spy Ship Yantar Now Diving On Wreck Of Russian Ship In Med*
Thus, Russian State Media pre-empted any possible Russian investigation.
Healy wasn't nervous. If you look at a longer extract of his Commons statement, you'll see he was perfectly relaxed, cracking a joke beforehand.
Channel: *Times Radio* Video: *Putin’s spy ship spotted in British waters, defence minister reveals*
Pure speculative projection.
Is that you Putin? 😂 Lots of interesting marine life of interest for Russia in English economical water? You should have invited the British navy when they popped up to say hello. Don't be shy to share the life of plankton. 😂
Well, now Trash Radio goes underwater !? Not a wise move...
No one is afraid of Russian trolls. You’re boring.
Is that what Putin said?😂
Why
@@Timmt09 There is no clear wasters and it's for sure without any "revival". Too dangerous for the dive.
@@alexanderlazarev3570 Try writing in English next time.