Ship Universe is designed for maritime stakeholders: lower costs with data-backed decisions. Mobile-friendly but designed for desktop research. Data is fluid, verify critical details before acting.
The global "shadow fleet" that moves sanctioned crude has expanded into a parallel system of older, lightly regulated tankers, with estimates suggesting that roughly 16 percent of the crude fleet tied to sanctioned trades and more than 3,000 vessels now operating with limited oversight or data visibility. At the same time, India has tightened insurance verification for ships calling at its ports, and an Aframax tanker, Tiger 6, carrying ESPO crude for Indian Oil Corp was kept waiting off Paradip after officials paused discharge until they could confirm cover from a Russian non IG insurer online. Together, the safety concerns around dark ships and India’s real world enforcement example spell higher compliance costs, more idle days for risky tonnage, and a clearer premium for transparent operators.
📎 Click here for 30 second summary
Shadow tankers meet India’s new gatekeepers
A growing shadow fleet of older tankers is carrying sanctioned crude with weaker oversight, while India is starting to test P&I cover at the port gate. The delay of the Aframax Tiger 6 off Paradip, while officials verified its Russian insurance online, shows how quickly documentation checks can turn into real waiting time and cost.
🛢️ The fleet in question
A sizeable slice of the crude fleet now trades in a parallel system that leans on ageing ships, opaque ownership and non IG insurers. These vessels often have patchy AIS tracks and repeat ship to ship transfers, which raises safety, spill and enforcement risk for every player sharing the sea lanes.
📑 What India has started to do
India now asks for live verification of P&I certificates, especially when cover comes from Russian or other non IG providers. At Paradip, that meant Tiger 6 waited offshore until officials could confirm that its policy was genuine and paid. Similar checks at other ports would slow down the least transparent part of the fleet first.
💰 Impact on earnings and risk
For dark or borderline ships, every extra day at anchor erodes the discount that made these trades attractive. For compliant owners, tighter screening can lift tonne days, limit unsafe competition and support a rate premium where charterers value clean records, reliable AIS and strong P&I backing.
Bottom line: the combination of a larger shadow fleet and tougher port checks shifts value toward fleets that can prove who they are, where they have been and who insures them. Operators that lean into transparency are better placed to keep moving when the paperwork on riskier tonnage starts to stick.
Shadow Fleet Expansion And Indian Insurance: Industry Impact
Item
Summary
Business Mechanics
Bottom-Line Effect
Shadow fleet share and scale
Industry estimates now put roughly one sixth of the crude tanker fleet into sanctioned or high risk trades, with several thousand older ships operating with limited oversight.
Redeployed and end of life tonnage moves into opaque structures that focus on discounted barrels, minimal maintenance and looser flag and class conditions.
📉 More substandard ships in circulation increase casualty and spill risk for everyone. 📈 Compliant owners can justify stronger terms where counterparty quality is valued.
Safety and environmental exposure
Many dark fleet vessels are older units run hard on sanction trades, with concerns around maintenance, class status, and ability to respond if something fails at sea.
Repeated high risk ship to ship operations, limited port state control, and patchy insurance increase the probability that a single failure creates a high profile pollution case.
📉 A major casualty would trigger stricter rules for all tanker operators, not only those on dark trades, and could raise capital and insurance costs across the board.
Data and visibility gaps
Shadow fleet operators frequently switch off or manipulate AIS, creating blind spots in traffic data and weakening incident learning and trade statistics.
Less reliable position and voyage history makes routing, benchmarking and risk modelling harder for ports, pilots, insurers and legitimate operators.
📉 More uncertainty around who is nearby and what they carry, 📈 greater value for fleets that can prove continuous visibility and verifiable track records.
Tiger 6 insurance delay
Aframax tanker Tiger 6, under EU and UK sanctions and carrying ESPO crude for Indian Oil Corp, waited off Paradip after discharge was postponed while port authorities checked its P&I cover.
The vessel is insured by Russian provider Soglasie, one of the non International Group insurers recognised by India. Officials paused operations until they could confirm the policy online under new rules.
📉 Extra days at anchor raise costs for owner and charterer. 📈 Sends a clear signal that documentation for sanctioned or older ships will be tested in practice, not just on paper.
India insurance verification rules
Since 2025, India has required online verification of P&I certificates, especially for ships covered by non IG clubs, to filter out forged or unpaid cover.
The regulator checks authenticity and premium payment status before allowing berthing. Vessels without valid or verifiable cover can be denied access to ports.
📉 Greater entry risk and time loss for shadow fleet ships. 📈 Compliant fleets that keep documentation in order face an admin burden but enjoy smoother port clearance.
Non IG cover and dark trades
Many ships used on sanction linked trades rely on non IG insurers or less transparent arrangements, which are now under closer review in some ports.
When key importers insist on verifiable insurance, the business case for very old or poorly documented tonnage erodes and more voyages face delay or rejection.
📉 Financing and resale prospects for opaque units weaken. 📈 IG backed and well documented fleets gain a clearer competitive edge in cargo allocations.
Freight and utilisation effects
If enforcement like India’s spreads, some dark fleet capacity will sit idle more often or take longer routes to friendlier ports, changing effective supply.
Longer waiting and diversions increase voyage days per cargo. Even if global demand is flat, the number of ship days required to move a given volume can rise.
📈 Potential support for earnings on compliant fleets if risky tonnage is constrained. 📉 Volatility in trades where enforcement is uneven or changes quickly.
Owner response toolkit
Operators that invest in visibility, clean ownership structures and strong P&I relationships can use this environment to differentiate.
Practical steps include proactive sharing of verified insurance details, robust AIS and log keeping, and pre clearance conversations with ports and charterers.
📈 Better charterer confidence, higher acceptance on sensitive routes and scope to negotiate higher hire where risk screening is intensive.
Notes: Shadow fleet estimates and safety concerns are based on recent industry commentary and op ed analysis. Tiger 6 information reflects November 2025 reporting on the Paradip delay and India P&I verification rules. Effects vary by ship age, flag, insurer and trade lane.
One story, two forces: more dark ships, stricter gatekeeping
A growing pool of older, opaque tankers is moving sanctioned barrels while importers like India are tightening checks on P&I cover and documentation. The result is a squeeze that can strand risky tonnage and reward fleets that invest in transparency and verifiable insurance.
Shadow fleet in one glance
Older crude tankers gravitate to sanctioned or high risk trades at discounted rates.
Voyages often involve AIS gaps, shell ownership structures and non IG P&I cover.
Each dark vessel erodes shared traffic awareness and raises casualty and spill risk.
India’s Paradip signal
Tiger 6, a sanctioned Aframax with Russian ESPO crude, waited off Paradip while P&I cover from Soglasie was checked online.
New rules require real time verification of certificates from non IG insurers.
Delays show that enforcement can move from policy text to the quay wall very quickly.
Pressure point
Who likely benefits
Who feels the strain
Port entry tied to online insurance checks
Owners with IG backed cover, clean loss records and responsive brokers.
Vessels insured by opaque or slow to verify non IG providers.
Higher scrutiny of older tonnage
Younger fleets that invested in renewal and class standards.
Ageing units that depend on sanction trades to stay employed.
Growing focus on AIS gaps and dark activity
Operators that maintain continuous signals and strong audit trails.
Ships with repeated blackouts or identity changes in sensitive zones.
Delay risk around sanctioned cargo flows
Owners who avoid the most contentious barrels and focus on cleaner trades.
Charterers that rely on discounted flows into ports that now test documents line by line.
Where tension is highest right now
Russian crude into India and Asia
High strain
Other sanctioned or discounted crude routes
Elevated
Clean mainstream tanker trades
Moderate
Levels are directional and reflect current focus on Russian barrels, older ships and non IG insurance in Indian and other import markets.
Growing enforcement around P&I verification and dark activity is starting to turn policy language into real delay days and real cost for some ships. For owners and operators, the practical play now is to decide which side of this line you want to be on: chasing discounted but fragile trades with higher documentation risk, or leaning into cleaner routes where verifiable cover, younger tonnage and good data can earn a premium. The Tiger 6 case shows that port states are willing to press pause while they validate insurance, and as more administrations follow that path the value of transparent fleets, strong clubs and reliable signals is likely to climb.
