PDA

View Full Version : Mumbai


Jedburgh
February 5, 2010, 12:48 PM
I've recently completed a research project on the Mumbai Attack of November 2008 for a client. I thought that I'd post an unclassified version here for those interested. The file is about 1.5 MB so it will take a second to load. You can download it here - Mumbai Attack Reconstruction (http://jedburgh-usa.com/mumbai-attack-november-2008/).

It's actually two files, a presentation with maps followed by a timeline and order of battle. You'll need adobe reader to view the files.

DOL

vox rationis
February 5, 2010, 07:13 PM
Very interesting, thanks for posting. From a professional point of view, could the Indian security forces have anything better?

Double Naught Spy
February 5, 2010, 08:33 PM
Interesting, yes, thank you for posting it.

Jedburgh
February 6, 2010, 08:42 AM
Thanks guys. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Let me know what you think of it. I'm looking for critical feedback.

DOL

Uncle Buck
February 6, 2010, 09:23 AM
Very interesting.

Mr. Davis
February 6, 2010, 11:32 AM
I will read this with interest. Thank you.

smince
February 6, 2010, 11:42 AM
So, what are the chances of something similar happening in America?

Matt19
February 6, 2010, 12:17 PM
Smince, the chances of it happening in America are quite high in my view. The biggest difference is that terrorists might start their operation where 1 person with a concealed weapon could change the entire dynamic from the outset by simply engaging them.

What would truly be terrifying is if terrorists decided to use the Russian situation where they took over a school.

Double Naught Spy
February 6, 2010, 12:28 PM
So, what are the chances of something similar happening in America?

The chances of a terrorist attack in America are exceptionally good. Why this sort of attack hasn't happened yet is a bit surprising. The big difference would be that the response by law enforcement would be quicker and significantly more substantial. After the initial response by street officers who may or may not have long guns, follow-up response would definitely include officers with semi and/or full automatic long guns and much more ammunition. If the attack managed to last more than a few hours, then no doubt additional local (surrounding area) and federal resources would have time to arrive on scene as well.

Let me know what you think of it. I'm looking for critical feedback.

You may not be concerned with editorial issues, but what is with the weird time dentotations? What write "9.00am" instead of "9:00 am"

On page 1 of Movement to Mumbai, you note that Romeo departs via taxi for CST Railway Station. Before this time, you have not said who or what Romeo is. Later I read that Romeo is on of the terrorist teams. Maybe you should include something earlier on denoting people and team names so that the reader will better understand. From this initial mention of the name, I thought Romeo was the name of an individual, not a team.
On page 2 of Movement to Mumbai, just how do you know things like the rubber life raft was inflated after the crew and captain have been killed?

Some for Tango 1 and 2 as with Romeo.

In Romeo Gets Sideways, you refer to "Romeo" and "Team Romeo" Are they one in the same?

Who or what is Team Oscar?

What are NSG Commandos?

What is Navy MARCOS?

Who is November? Is November the same as Team November?

In The Fight for Taj Mahal Hotel, you note that NSG engage "Tango." Do you mean that they engaged "a" Tango or is "Tango" a specific designation. How is "Tango" different from "Tango 1" and "Tango 2" mentioned previously?

In your Mumbai Attack Timeline and Order of Battle, you finally designate names, but this is after they have already been used in a confusing manner.

Previously you had designated nautical miles to be "nm" but revert here to the long spelling. You also changed the format for writing time (e.g. 4pm instead of the 4.00pm used earlier)

You seem to keep switching back and forth in your name designations, such as November and Team November. It may be meaningless, but since this is a technical report, I would assume that such designations would imply different meanings, only you never say one way or the other. If such inconsistencies have no meaning difference, then it makes your report look sloppy even if it is factually correct.

2nd page of the timeline, cafe is in lower case and should be a cap as it is a proper name.

Your whole timeline issue seems to be a duplicate of information presented early on, but with new information added that was not seen early on. Some names are clarified in the timeline that were not clear at the beginning. In short, this presentation is a bit of an organizational nightmare. If I were you, I would delete the Movement to Mumbai section and following sections until the timeline and start the timeline right after the Terrorist Equipment page. I suggest this because the timeline has information not in the Movement section that clarifies many of your vague references in the Momvement and following sections. Incorporate the maps into the relevant locations of the timeline.

Sorry if these comments sound picky, but Jedburgh Corp is supposed to be a professional company. This report has a lot of inconsistencies and is organizationally-challenged, which causes confusion. Is that how you want Jedburgh to be perceived?

Uncle Buck
February 6, 2010, 01:23 PM
What steps would you recommend to take to prevent from being a casualty in a situation like this?

Barricade yourself into a room? Use lower profile hotels? (Although that may lead you to a situation in which you open yourself up to armed robbery instead of a terrorist attack.) Stick to taxis, when possible, and avoid mass transit?

With all our political correctness and being afraid someone is going to cry foul (See C.A.I.R. and their crap, known supporters of terrorist and such), we have left ourselves wide open for this type of attack. There is a distinct profile of most of these guys and we are afraid to use it because we will be called a racist. Will profiling catch them all? NO! But it will definitely aid in the detection of some.

By banning handguns within XXXX feet of a school, we have made our most vulnerable even more vulnerable. If an attack like this happened and the guns were obtained here in the U.S., there would be a call to ban more guns instead of an outcry that we have made a target friendly for the bad-guys.

Police can not be everywhere at once and in order to guard all high priority targets is very unreasonable.

Jedburgh
February 6, 2010, 04:14 PM
Double Naught - Thanks for the great feedback! The OB and Timeline should be first (before the maps, etc). When it was assembled, the order of the combined file was reversed. I've fixed it now.

Thanks again.

DOL

smince
February 6, 2010, 06:35 PM
Police can not be everywhere at once...Yep. That's why I've made it my goal to be armed everywhere I can be, with an adequate weapon and spare ammo (not a J-frame in the pocket) and the training to use it effectively. Do i expect to run into a Mumbai situation? Tell the truth, I don't know what I'll run into day-to-day.

LordofWar
February 6, 2010, 07:35 PM
Darra made (Darra=Tribal Area in Pakistan) made Tokarevs are something that people in the lowest income group buy. It comes as a shock to know that the Tokarevs used were Darra made and not Chinese or Russian.

However, Darra made Tokarevs are known to be smuggled to India from Pakistan and fetch probably 50 times more than what they're sold for in their country of origin so there is a good chance the Toks were acquired from the terrorists Indian counterparts as why would they use low quality Toks (with a 95% probability of malfunction) when Chinese Toks are readily available in Pakistan i.e. if/when they came in from Pakistan.

The terrorist wearing orange tshirt & cap seems to be holding a Russian 1974 manufactured AK-47. Notice the muzzle. I could be wrong.

These kind of attacks also happened in Pakistan but the terrorists were usually neutralized within minutes or sometimes in a few hours with minimum casualties. Mumbhai police's kind of ill trained & ill equipped. They still carry ancient .303 Lee Enfields and some 7.6X SLRs.

Well one reason why I carry. These days you never know what you might run into.

As for India they have very strict gun laws where the largest handgun calibre a civilian can own is probably .32 ACP. Import of firearms is also restricted since time immemorial so the .32 ACP there is surely from Genghis Khan era . ;)

LordofWar
February 6, 2010, 07:40 PM
Btw do you have any information on the type of ammo that was used?

Would help you a lot in connecting the dots.

Also Type 56 AK-47s are mostly legally imported, atleast in Pakistan. So if the AKs came in from Pakistan the best thing would be to check with Norinco or Polytech. Atleast they'll know who the importer was.

ChileVerde1
February 6, 2010, 09:03 PM
This incident has been formally mentioned more than once here at my Border Patrol Station in South Florida. Not to suggest, we know anything is imminent, but merely to suggest we (all Floridians both LEO and civilians) need to be prepared and vigilant for just such an attack.

The Bahamas, which is a stone's throw from FL by boat, admits people from 166 different countries around the world into their island nation with no visa. Many of these are terrorist "source" countries. Do the math!

MTT TL
February 6, 2010, 09:37 PM
The chances of a terrorist attack in America are exceptionally good. Why this sort of attack hasn't happened yet is a bit surprising.

Not so surprising. This was an invasion with 12-18 months of prep and training time. The resources (grenades, full auto weapons etc) are not readily available in the US. A similar style attack could occur but it would likely be not as effective. Still this did not stop the Ft. Dix guys from planning one. If they had not been so inept it probably would have gone off as planned.

The big difference would be that the response by law enforcement would be quicker and significantly more substantial. After the initial response by street officers who may or may not have long guns, follow-up response would definitely include officers with semi and/or full automatic long guns and much more ammunition.

I am not so sure that police response would be that much more rapid. While their weaponry, leadership and organizational skills are much better the big disadvantage would be the lack will by of by local law enforcement officials to engage active shooter targets. US LEOs like to wait until the gun man kills himself or runs out of ammo before moving in. However unless they strike a disarmed city (NYC, CHI, SF, ETC) there would also likely be a response from civilians as well. So for example an attack on a hotel would result in more than a few of the guests being armed instead of being mowed down indiscriminately. A disarmament zone would likely result in similar numbers.

Even a response by armed civilians would not be particularly effective against armored gunmen, but it would likely be better than the immediate police response.

If the attack managed to last more than a few hours, then no doubt additional local (surrounding area) and federal resources would have time to arrive on scene as well.

I would say you could virtually count on it.

00- I don't think you are being nit-picky at all with the report, those are valid concerns.

Slopemeno
February 7, 2010, 04:21 AM
My state agency had a similar theme in one of it's large yearly training scenarios in 2006 or so. Post Columbine the trianing has shifted to the responders teaming up to go after the shooters.

MTT TL
February 7, 2010, 12:52 PM
Maybe so but there has been no culture shift. Nearly all of the recent shootings it has been a recurrent theme.

ChileVerde1
February 8, 2010, 12:42 PM
US LEOs like to wait until the gun man kills himself or runs out of ammo before moving in.

NOT TRUE (Respectfully)! It depends on the type of environment and the dynamics of the situations. Barricaded subject where a hostage has been taken = we have specialized teams for that (SWAT, Negotiators, etc...). Sometimes it's smarter to wait it out if there are no other innocent lives at risk or if negotiations are possible.

In a Dynamic flowing situation such as Mumbai, we would most certainly engage. Examples: the North Hollywood Shootout, FBI Miami Shootout, The Ft. Hood Terrorist Attack......... I could go on and on.

Civilians could do better (paraphrased). Though in my opinion, I certainly would want, or would not discourage their help, to this I have to say, NOT HARDLY, again respectfully.

I'm really not sure where you're getting your info about US LEO's but your statements fly in the face of any training I've ever recieved and the Oath of Office I swore to uphold, not to mention all those brave men and women in blue who have fallen not waiting on the gunman to run out of ammo or take his own life. But maybe nextime we should let an "angry mob" handle the next major shootout. I'm sure they'd be much more inclined, better armed, and braver in the face of danger not to mention have far better coms, tactics, and coordination.

MTT TL
February 8, 2010, 08:50 PM
I'm really not sure where you're getting your info about US LEO's but your statements fly in the face of any training I've ever recieved and the Oath of Office I swore to uphold, not to mention all those brave men and women in blue who have fallen not waiting on the gunman to run out of ammo or take his own life.

Perhaps that assessment is too harsh. But Columbine, VA Tech and other events come to mind whereby there are armed officers outside waiting backup/ SWAT during active shooting situation.

Only S&W and Me
February 8, 2010, 09:11 PM
I was just in Mumbai a few weeks ago...the nice hotels have higher security now checking all vehicles and people coming in. Still an attack could happen again easily...even with the additions.

Jedburgh
February 11, 2010, 03:43 PM
I updated my site with a discussion on the implications of a Mumbai-style attack as it relates to active shooter protocol. You can read it here. (http://jedburgh-usa.com/counter-terrorism-tactics-for-law-enforcement/)

DOL

MTT TL
February 11, 2010, 04:45 PM
The Mumbai attack changed the profile of the active shooter. These determined terrorists were not afraid to confront police, even well-trained and well-equipped national counter-terrorism forces. Of the 104 killed in the Mumbai attack, 18 were police officers. Would you ask the same “average” patrol officer to confront a pair of terrorists armed with military rifles, grenades and explosives? Alone?

This model is not that new but is rare thing (North Hollywood, Ft. Dix others..). But I would ask it, if the officers encountered such a situation to take on the shooters.

But my expectations are high. I would expect that patrol cars should have a carbine or rifle accessible capable of defeating level III armor at a minimum. I would expect that the officer be well trained and proficient in it's use. Proper training, proper tools, emphasis on the first one.

I don't know if my expectations are realistic, but they are there.

LordofWar
February 11, 2010, 04:55 PM
NEWS: The terrorist's lawyer was assasinated today.

Double Naught Spy
February 11, 2010, 06:12 PM
Not so surprising. This was an invasion with 12-18 months of prep and training time. The resources (grenades, full auto weapons etc) are not readily available in the US. A similar style attack could occur but it would likely be not as effective. Still this did not stop the Ft. Dix guys from planning one. If they had not been so inept it probably would have gone off as planned.

There are a variety of semi-auto weapons that can be converted to full auto without too much trouble. As for getting weapons into the country, it can't be that hard given what all comes across the border from Mexico illegally, some of what comes through the Canadian border.

I am not so sure that police response would be that much more rapid. While their weaponry, leadership and organizational skills are much better the big disadvantage would be the lack will by of by local law enforcement officials to engage active shooter targets. US LEOs like to wait until the gun man kills himself or runs out of ammo before moving in. However unless they strike a disarmed city (NYC, CHI, SF, ETC) there would also likely be a response from civilians as well. So for example an attack on a hotel would result in more than a few of the guests being armed instead of being mowed down indiscriminately. A disarmament zone would likely result in similar numbers.

Even a response by armed civilians would not be particularly effective against armored gunmen, but it would likely be better than the immediate police response.

Since we are comparing what happened in Mumbaii to what might happen in the US, note the slow response and lack of weaponry (especially ammo) carried by the police. Compare that with the North Hollywood shootout where 300-400 officers were involves in the response in less than an hour.

As far as the civilian response, oh sure, all those folks who talk about how they don't carry more than 5 or 8 rounds because there isn't any need will probably show up with their 5 or 8 rounds. ;) http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397789

STEINER
February 11, 2010, 06:37 PM
I really believe that if anything at all starts happening it will be suicide bombers. Not much we will be able to respond to.
They know. What most of us can't conceive is that one person has no reservations about killing there self in the name of a religion.
It is sad but coming.

firespec35
February 11, 2010, 08:36 PM
I'm not in a position to download the file but will soon. I did want to comment on police response though.
Late last year I was privellaged to be involved in a Va tech style scenario at a major urban university near me and their police depts response. Now granted this is a well equipped dept and they all either carry a shotgun or patrol carbine in their car but their theory is definately not sit and wait. Their policy is the first 4 to arrive are the entry team and their job is to stop the shooter(s). Now mind you this is a spread out urban campus and they had bodies in the door at about 5 min from 1st 911 call. I had the easy job of standing by for injuries to the police or actors in the scenario but it was impressive to me

MTT TL
February 11, 2010, 08:48 PM
There are a variety of semi-auto weapons that can be converted to full auto without too much trouble. As for getting weapons into the country, it can't be that hard given what all comes across the border from Mexico illegally, some of what comes through the Canadian border.

Oh, I did not say they can't get them, just not readily available. You don't see too many live hand grenades at the gun show. One of the factors that has been slowing down attacks is lack of access to weapons. This is one of the reasons I support background checks for gun purchases.

Since we are comparing what happened in Mumbaii to what might happen in the US, note the slow response and lack of weaponry (especially ammo) carried by the police. Compare that with the North Hollywood shootout where 300-400 officers were involves in the response in less than an hour.

That is a good point. The police were pretty much helpless against the armored gun men so they went to a local gun store and cleared the shelves getting the proper required weaponry.

All that stuff is illegal these days in California now so the gun shops don't have it anymore.

Too bad cops. Your government just killed you and a lot of citizens too.

Also that was just one team on foot so the police were able to mass in one spot on the shooters more easily. Multiple teams attacking soft targets like hotels staying on the move with vehicles will present a much bigger problem that few departments train for or think about. Consider the Michael McLendon shooting which required military assistance to the police to maintain order and was effectively ended by an off duty conservation officer with a privately owned AR-15. Imagine ten McLendon's running around town doing the same thing and you have Mumbai.

As far as the civilian response, oh sure, all those folks who talk about how they don't carry more than 5 or 8 rounds because there isn't any need will probably show up with their 5 or 8 rounds.

Probably ineffective even if they have 45 rounds. But they will slow the BGs down and might get lucky. To believe what people post on gun boards many people would not engage unless they or their families were directly at risk anyway. Still, any civilian response is better than NO civilian response which is what you had in Mumbai.

smince
February 12, 2010, 09:48 AM
To believe what people post on gun boards many people would not engage unless they or their families were directly at risk anyway.Yes, if I have my family with me, first priority is to get them clear/safe. Only engage if they are between us and the exit.

If I'm solo, I might look at things a bit different.

zippyfusenet
February 12, 2010, 02:36 PM
LordOfWar: NEWS: The terrorist's lawyer was assasinated today.

I saw that story. It was described as a professional hit. Who do you think killed that lawyer, and why?

BlueTrain
February 12, 2010, 02:48 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Oklahoma City bombing. It wasn't a Middle Eastern, it was a Middle Western but the net effect was the same. Who is it here who says the danger is from within? Problem is, if you pulled your gun and engaged the nearest bad guy, how do you keep from being identified as one of them?

Balog
February 12, 2010, 07:08 PM
I'd wager most of the people who fantasize about mowing down the hordes of rifle-totin' body armored baddies who are shooting up the mall have never had to actually engage a rifle armed opponent. And that goes double for the ones who think they're all set 'cause they have a BuG and 3 magazines for the primary. :rolleyes: