Missing ship may have secret cargo

I have just come across an interesting link:

www.marinetraffic.com...

On 2009-07-17 the ship was indeed in Kaliningrad. At one of the piers adjacent to Portovaya Ulitsa. I'll work on this some more...

And what was it doing at Svetlyy the same day at 20.36?


[edit on 15/8/2009 by Voiceoftreason]

I'm sure it's just firewood that they are transporting.

I am starting to think this all may be a "false flag" by the Soviets to allow them to deploy the Russian Navy to battle/blockade Gorgia prior to a land invasion.

This will keep any resupply from other "3rd party" countries entering the area.

The only way to resupply Georgia will be by air, which as we all know for the USA is stretched pretty thin keeping Iraq and Afghanistan going.

reply to post by In nothing we trust


All the news regarding the ship is absolutely amazing. Someone posted the Sorcha Faal, aka Sorta False take on the story, a couple pages back.

"Sorta False" actually had some decent thoughts to make wild conspiracies true.

This is currently being discussed on coast to coast am.

It's Ian talking tonight, and they are going over in detail. Good listen...

Try kidoam.com for free stream.

reply to post by da pickles


That's true and it is easy to change data that AIS sending but why to do that? To harness the searching of Arctic Sea?

French navy said that when Arctic Sea AIS signal were send in Biscay Bay there were three Russian warships at this very location but no Arctic Sea. So, Russian warships send fake signal or there was AIS transmitter organised by possible hijackers. But only one signal, makes me wonder, why the fake. Everyone could do that with AIS but why.

French still claim that Arctic Sea is north from Cap Verde.

Also difference between position data of two vessel tracking system APRS.fi and marinetraffic is odd.
Marinetraffic Itineraries data of Arctic Sea were deleted/not available at some time. Later on data comes back online and now we can see full position data from the day of "hijacking" 24/7/2009. However APRS.fi system which collects data from marinetraffic has not data from that hijacking day because it fetch data almost realtime from marinetraffic but NOT any two weeks old or older data because it has already collected into APRS database. So, I think that APRS has right data but marinetraffic 24/7 is manipulated later on air and into the marinetraffic.

I know that there is backbone system for AIS because AIS can be faked. As far as I know the backbone is secret system and secure, in Baltic sea Finland has this kind of backbone. Maybe data to marinetraffic is collected there....or it really is fake data and if so, then we cannot trust any on Arctic Sea positions.


Russian NATO ambassador Dmitri Rogozin told RIA Novosti news agency that all NATO data regarding to this case will be sended to Russian navy.
He also said that "Operation Arctic Sea progress is successful".

Operation Arctic Sea.




[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

This just out:

www.youtube.com...

No groundbreaking news here, but we're obviously not the only ones to think something's very fishy...

Also this article here, with a lot more interesting information, although I'm not sure of the credibility of the particular newspaper:

www.dailymail.co.uk...

[edit on 16/8/2009 by Voiceoftreason]

Northwoods - you said that you had a Geiger counter and you seem really well placed to carry out local investigations. Were you or anyone you know able to check the radioactivity levels around Arctic Sea's berth in Finland?

Also - has any law enforcement agency confirmed or speculated who made the ransom demand, or is it simply being attributed to the hijackers?



[edit on 16-8-2009 by tangotemper]

Originally posted by northwoods
reply to post by da pickles

 

That's true and it is easy to change data that AIS sending but why to do that? To harness the searching of Arctic Sea?

French navy said that when Arctic Sea AIS signal were send in Biscay Bay there were three Russian warships at this very location but no Arctic Sea. So, Russian warships send fake signal or there was AIS transmitter organised by possible hijackers. But only one signal, makes me wonder, why the fake. Everyone could do that with AIS but why.

...

[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

The cost of the ship is enough to settle debts when deals go bad. Russia, having inherited all that ever was Soviet in technology, has full access and usage of the Soviet Ocean Surveillance System. If they want to know where the ship is at, they can get it. Don't forget that they have the Ilyushin Il-38 "May" aircraft. Its their mission version of the US P-3 Orion. Long station time, can cover literally thousands of square miles of ocean in short order. The Il-38 has a mission length of 5,130 nmi, unrefueled.

This is important: "French navy said that when Arctic Sea AIS signal were send in Biscay Bay there were three Russian warships at this very location"

How do they know that? SIGINT. France, Spain, the UK, the US, Russia, etc.. all have rather technologically advanced signals intelligence capability. Spoofing a signal is never out of the question. It's just a matter of how convincing you make the ruse. Evidently France didn't buy it.

Can the ship be located? Easily. The question is why all the drama? Misdirection? Yeah, if the only people you are trying to deceive are the general public. Modern navys aren't gonna buy it and can probably find something this large in their sleep. And that's not even counting the satellite capabilities.

Little bit off-topic but I remember the interview that Finnish president Tarja Halonen give last tuesday 11/8 when she was meeting with Medvedev and suprisingly also with Mr. Putin. Reporter asks Halonen what was agenda with Putin, what is the discussion? Halonen answers liitle bit nervous: "its nothing that is worht of news".

Theres some news about Halonen's visit in Sochi:
newsroom.finland.fi...

reply to post by tangotemper


I doubt they let people in the dock area, we'd have to go in ninja style if we wanted to snoop around with a geiger counter. Or maybe a small bribe to the harbor master... hhmmm.

Hi newbie here, that has been following this site for a while and this story..

More unsubstantiated news from the daily mail (wouldn't trust them myself)
www.dailymail.co.uk...

basically adding that the Fins have been seen with Geiger counters where the Arctic Sea was docked.. however the Daily Mail tends to be a bit misleading..

BTW why would pirates want £1million for a ship, crew and cargo that are together worth more than that.. if it was a £20 million starting figure then it would look to me more like pirates, but £1m?

Anyway my issue with this is the first boarding.. I live in a small south coast port in England and we have vessels in no larger than the Arctic Sea all the time, and I travel the English Channel frequently, and seen 3 similar sized ships wrecked on our beached..

The issue I wonder is, if the Arctic Sea was boarded for 12 hours, did they stop or continue.. if they stopped for 12 hours that would have raised an alarm.. due to as I said above the risks involved to other shipping.

here's a snap shot video of the channel.. called Britain from above.. to give you an understanding of the erratic nature of keeping the volume of ships moving. hence a stationary ship would be very dangerous.

www.youtube.com...

Ok so if we assume this ship continued sailing for 12 hours at 15 knots then that would put the Arctic sea about 180 nautical miles from the boarding point and at least 3 miles out to sea.

When anyone goes out to a ship, they return to the same point, not place themselves 180 nautical miles away. Unless of course they had a fair sized ship shadowing the Arctic Sea, or have some form of land based operation to follow them to the return point.

So what type of cost would be involved in that kind of operation? and would a £1 million get you much of a return?

let's put that to one side for a moment, since I know a little bit of our coast guard operations and how well they monitor the channel.. The systems at Dover are no different from an Air traffic controller..

The point I am trying to get to is the coast guard would have rang a million alarm bells if someone reported they had been tied up etc for 12 hours... questions like who was manning and sailing the ship during this period.. from the coast guard's perspective that would be dangerous, even the simplest question would have been to ask if the person navigating the ship had a masters licence.

Pointless I know if the boarders had left, but ask yourself what would happen if a pilot told an air traffic controller someone else had been flying his plane.. think about it for a moment.. would they have allowed the plane to continue or demand it land.

This incident was bizarre enough to raise a million alarms before the ship left the English Channel, regardless whether the pirates (hoho) were still on the ship, the coast guard would have sent ships out or helicopters out to investigate.. Gee, where I am if a dog is seen on the cliffs they send out a Helicopter, would they not do the same in this case?

So to me this smells very fishy.

As an aside and probably has nothing to do with this, on the approximate day that the Arctic Sea passing where I am on the south coast, Chinooks flew overhead out to sea before returning about 20 mins later, as one passed overhead heading in land another appeared and flew out to sea.. that happened 3 times, I took some pics because it was really bizarre as I've never seen anything like that before, and only with my conspiracy theory tin hat am I adding this.


[edit on 16-8-2009 by thoughtsfull]

[edit on 16-8-2009 by thoughtsfull]

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Share some pics please?

If this all is related to UFOs. something big. I've just wearing my tinfoil hat.

Hi ya

They are just your standard Chinook Pics in the usual UK green camouflage scheme,

I only took the pics as it was strange to see them over head where I live as I've only ever seen Coast Guard Helicopters head out to sea.

It was only in a tin foil hat moment that I added that to my post.. I'm doubtful whether a Helicopter the size of a Chinook could land on the Arctic Sea and air lift anything off.

Still find this whole thing confusing...

[edit on 16-8-2009 by thoughtsfull]

London jewelry robbery and Arctic Sea, interesting combination.

Why is the Russian Navy scrambling to find this ship? I can see why one might think the ship could be part of a F.F operation. There's the boarding. And where is the ship? It seems to me it would be hard to hide something that big. Also the announcement that there may be a secret cargo. Considering statements made and all of the unanswered questions this all seems very strange and suspect. Star and Flag

Originally posted by northwoods
reply to post by da pickles

 

So, I think that APRS has right data but marinetraffic 24/7 is manipulated later on air and into the marinetraffic.

I think marinetraffic has right data. Look two days (!) before the hijacking day. You will find another curious manoeuvre of Arctic Sea (22/7). Either the ship went up and down for an hour or the AIS was cloned.

On my website worldcontent.twoday.net...

I have documented this part of the route (2nd picture). It's very suspected.

Originally posted by RoofMonkey

Originally posted by northwoods
reply to post by da pickles

 

That's true and it is easy to change data that AIS sending but why to do that? To harness the searching of Arctic Sea?

French navy said that when Arctic Sea AIS signal were send in Biscay Bay there were three Russian warships at this very location but no Arctic Sea. So, Russian warships send fake signal or there was AIS transmitter organised by possible hijackers. But only one signal, makes me wonder, why the fake. Everyone could do that with AIS but why.

...

[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

[edit on 16-8-2009 by northwoods]

The cost of the ship is enough to settle debts when deals go bad. Russia, having inherited all that ever was Soviet in technology, has full access and usage of the Soviet Ocean Surveillance System. If they want to know where the ship is at, they can get it. Don't forget that they have the Ilyushin Il-38 "May" aircraft. Its their mission version of the US P-3 Orion. Long station time, can cover literally thousands of square miles of ocean in short order. The Il-38 has a mission length of 5,130 nmi, unrefueled.

This is important: "French navy said that when Arctic Sea AIS signal were send in Biscay Bay there were three Russian warships at this very location"

How do they know that? SIGINT. France, Spain, the UK, the US, Russia, etc.. all have rather technologically advanced signals intelligence capability. Spoofing a signal is never out of the question. It's just a matter of how convincing you make the ruse. Evidently France didn't buy it.

Can the ship be located? Easily. The question is why all the drama? Misdirection? Yeah, if the only people you are trying to deceive are the general public. Modern navys aren't gonna buy it and can probably find something this large in their sleep. And that's not even counting the satellite capabilities.

RM
I am with you here. I have scanned the thread and unless I missed it you seem to be the only mention of low earth orbit surveillance.
and as you say spy plane capability.
So in essence it's just about motive?
I hope this has a happy ending!

Also thanks OP for getting this adult game of clue started!

Does anyone know the port that the Artic Sea was supposed to dock-up at after it left Finnland? A date?
thnks

Hmmmm.... How does this fit into the game?

Missing cargo ship was tested for radiation: official

The missing cargo ship the Arctic Sea was checked for radioactive material before it left port in Finland, but tests turned out negative, the Finnish nuclear agency said Sunday.

Jukka Laaksonen, the head of the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, said "stupid" firefighters decided to conduct tests on the ship at the port of Pietarsaari even though there was no reason to believe it contained radioactive material.

"Some fireman for some reason thought that there might be some radioactivity involved in this shipment and that was a very stupid idea. There was no basis for that," Laaksonen told AFP.

stupid firefighters? What do you think? disinfo to quell the rumors circulating about a potential secret cargo? or could it be the truth?

I don't know, but I want to thank all the members for keeping an eye on this mystery....

I will keep an eye out for any new articles for you to ponder.. Keep digging