Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

lloydslist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 198 posts

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#11

Post by creato »

SilverElfin wrote: post #3

I think this is really because ship crews are abused and have no choice. The companies don’t have executives on ships. It’s some maritime crew, often from India, that’s told to just take the risk with their own lives. And if they want to keep their jobs they have to comply.

I would think that the shipping executives are less willing to take the risk to run the strait than the crews are. Being stuck for months with very little freedom, uncertain future, uncertain supplies, missiles and drones flying overhead, it sounds like hell.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#12

Post by dragontamer »

rayiner wrote: post #2

Nobody is talking about how big of a failure this has been on the part of the U.S. Navy. Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy since Roman times. The U.S. Navy was unable to achieve that objective in this war. Ill-advised American wars often end up as losses because we fail to achieve our political objectives. But this may be one of the few times we have been unable to ach…

Ehhhhh, not quite.

No matter how much military we put into the strait, Iran was just going to blow up UAE and Qatari refineries.

And despite all the madman theory of our current President, there's just too many bribes in those countries who have the attention of the President. So Total War is unacceptable to USA leaders.

-------

That being said: I'm still amused that the ship we needed in this fight was the long cancelled Littoral Combat Ship

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#13

Post by justinator »

SilverElfin wrote: post #3

I think this is really because ship crews are abused and have no choice. The companies don’t have executives on ships. It’s some maritime crew, often from India, that’s told to just take the risk with their own lives. And if they want to keep their jobs they have to comply.

Not to say you're wrong, but I got a different impression from this report:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/29/podcasts/the-daily/iran-s...

From this report, I'm getting the feeling that they're running out of time to just float around and it's now or never.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#14

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

rayiner wrote: post #2

Nobody is talking about how big of a failure this has been on the part of the U.S. Navy. Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy since Roman times. The U.S. Navy was unable to achieve that objective in this war. Ill-advised American wars often end up as losses because we fail to achieve our political objectives. But this may be one of the few times we have been unable to ach…

US leadership wasn't willing to pay the cost of opening the strait. I dont blame the navy.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#15

Post by spiderfarmer »

pohl wrote: post #7
rayiner wrote: post #2

Nobody is talking about how big of a failure this has been on the part of the U.S. Navy. Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy since Roman times. The U.S. Navy was unable to achieve that objective in this war. Ill-advised American wars often end up as losses because we fail to achieve our political objectives. But this may be one of the few times we have been unable to ach…

Part of that traditional naval success has come from having presidents not stepping on their own dicks.

The US will never recover from the reputation damage they sustained by voting in a mindbogglingly stupid buffoon. Twice.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#16

Post by echelon »

rayiner wrote: post #2

Nobody is talking about how big of a failure this has been on the part of the U.S. Navy. Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy since Roman times. The U.S. Navy was unable to achieve that objective in this war. Ill-advised American wars often end up as losses because we fail to achieve our political objectives. But this may be one of the few times we have been unable to ach…

Drone warfare is new.

Now you can use a drone that costs a few thousand dollars to take out a hundred million dollar ship.

It's a pricing issue. Whereas before, you had to use expensive guided missiles or your own naval or air force assets, now you can send a bunch of cheap drones.

Everything we know about war is going to change.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#17

Post by e9 »

zug_zug wrote: post #4

Interesting https://hormuzstraitmonitor.com/ says we're at 8% of normal traffic. Curious as to the discrepancy.

Probably because they turn off transponders while crossing that area.

"Traffic is generally picking up in the strait, with several laden tankers seen exiting into the Gulf of Oman over the weekend, though some of them turned off their transponders. The latest was a Greek-flagged tanker carrying Iraqi crude to Singapore."

https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/iranian-crude-oil...

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#18

Post by tyfon »

SilverElfin wrote: post #3

I think this is really because ship crews are abused and have no choice. The companies don’t have executives on ships. It’s some maritime crew, often from India, that’s told to just take the risk with their own lives. And if they want to keep their jobs they have to comply.

This big question now is how many of them will travel back in there and potentially being stuck for months, or just swap ship if their current ship is headed there.

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#19

Post by fragmede »

echelon wrote: post #16
rayiner wrote: post #2

Nobody is talking about how big of a failure this has been on the part of the U.S. Navy. Controlling and securing shipping routes has been a fundamental function of a navy since Roman times. The U.S. Navy was unable to achieve that objective in this war. Ill-advised American wars often end up as losses because we fail to achieve our political objectives. But this may be one of the few times we have been unable to ach…

Drone warfare is new. Now you can use a drone that costs a few thousand dollars to take out a hundred million dollar ship. It's a pricing issue. Whereas before, you had to use expensive guided missiles or your own naval or air force assets, now you can send a bunch of cheap drones. Everything we know about war is going to change.

> Everything we know about war ~~is going to~~ has changed.

FTFY

Re: Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

#20

Post by Bender »

zug_zug wrote: post #4

Interesting https://hormuzstraitmonitor.com/ says we're at 8% of normal traffic. Curious as to the discrepancy.

"Maintained by an individual developer." They state,

Maritime Intelligence — AI-powered analysis of current strait conditions, insurance markets, and diplomatic developments using real-time web data.

Energy Market Feeds — Live Brent crude oil pricing from financial data providers.

AIS Vessel Tracking — Automatic Identification System data for real-time vessel positions.

TradingView — Interactive historical oil price charts with full technical analysis capabilities.

News Aggregation — Curated news from major international outlets covering the Hormuz crisis.

though they do not say what the actual data sources are.

Post reply on HN