Iran anti ship torpedo/missile, fact or fiction

[alexsa]

The article below appeared on an online defence page found at:

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_005444.php

My gut feeling is that Iran is providing this report the less informed outside Iran and for internal consumption givne the current polictical situation.

I find the claimed capability a little unbelievable noting that even if they got a torpedo/underwater missile up to 360 km an hour it would appear to be a little beyond belief that this wouel not be picked up by both active and passive systems. More to the point it wouel seem improbable that the weapon itself would be not be seriously effected by it own flow noise and/or the out flow of what ever is propelling it.

My feeling is this could be a bit of truth combined with a lot of fiction. Does anybody have any information on this system?

The claimed missile system at the end of the reprot seems to fall into the same category.

Iran Touts High-Speed Underwater Missile


(Source: Voice of America news; issued April 2, 2006)


Iran says it has successfully test-fired a high-speed underwater missile capable of destroying large warships and submarines - the second missile test reported by Tehran in recent days.

Iranian military authorities say the missile can reach speeds of 360 kilometers an hour, about four times the speed of a torpedo. They also say it cannot be detected by sonar.

The deputy commander of Iran's Navy, General Ali Fadavi told state media no warship can escape from the missile because of its speed.

Iran says it tested the missile Sunday during the third day of large-scale military maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.

This comes as Iran's envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency says the international community should negotiate with Tehran rather than issue U.N. Security Council statements on Iran's nuclear program.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh Sunday told the U.S. television network CNN the situation will deteriorate further the more the Council is involved in the issue. He said it is better to discuss a peaceful settlement to the dispute rather than using what he called threatening language.

Last week, the 15-member Council unanimously approved a statement calling on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment activity within 30 days.

On Friday, Iran said it test-fired an airborne missile that can evade radar and hit several targets simultaneously with warheads. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli later said the test showed Iran has an aggressive military program.

[LancerMc]

I highly doubt Iran produced such a missile/torpedo on their own. The most probable scenario is that Iran bought Russian high speed torpedoes. I believe this weapon is called a Scval. It is the weapon that is suspected in sinking the Kursk.

The U.S. navy has been working on ultra high speed torpedo's, but as for public information they are at least another probable 5 years away from fielding such a weapon.

For these weapons to achieve these high speeds underwater requires the torpedo to produce a bubble of air around the torpedo while it is under the water. It is essentially the same way SLICBM's are launched just over much longer distances.

[Vital]

Fact
Iran has these torpedoes

False
Iran has never developed such types of torpedoes. (They do not have enough knowledge in this field). They have bought it from Chine, I suppose;).

It was developed for the soviet Navy in 1960.
We call it "Shkval" (squall)
I think u can find a lot of info in the Internet, If u are really interested in.

[alexsa]

Fact
Iran has these torpedoes

Faulse
Iran has never developed such types of torpedoes. (They do not have enough knowledge in this field). They have bought it from Chine, I suppose;).

It was developed for the soviet Navy in 1960.
We call it "Shkval" (squall)
I think u can find a lot of info in the Internet, If u are really interested in.

I don't doubt that Iran may have purchased Russian equipemtn what I questionis the perforamce they are claiming. Here is another claim:

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,18696219%5E663,00.html

I sersiouly doubt anybody has a functioning 360 km/h underwater missile that is undetectable by sonar and cannot be avoided. I doubt the thing could see where it was going and would almost need to be straight line of pre programmed which does not bode well for accuracy.

I am willing to be corrected on this.

[Awang se]

360kmph, i can believe. undetected by sonar, sorry, to farfetch

[Vital]

You are correct.
I mean to say, that of course it is detectable. There is nothing in the world that can not be detected.

[gf0012-aust]

That torpedo is not a Skval.

It may have some basis of heritage, but it does not look like any of the images that I have rec'd from a number of UDT Conferences.

In addition, the other images of the same weapon in a manufacturing facility are obviously not the same weapons system either.

I'm reserving judgement until I see some more concrete proof from some different sources.

But, I repeat, that missile shown in the wargames is not a Shkval - its certainly not the weapon that I'm familiar with.

In fact the initial footage of that weapon shows a design that is very very close to USN concepts that were trialled some 15 years ago (about 9 years before Russian systems were announced)

The US supercav technology was applied to other R&D weapons systems which are still under development.

It's also very very different in design from the German tech which is being touted as reaching 500kph.

[Izzy1]

Any indication if the Iranian weapon is guided?

If memory serves, Shkval for instance is not.

[gf0012-aust]

Any indication if the Iranian weapon is guided?

doesn't appear to be - esp externally.

there are a couple of things that are being ignored in the rush to announce the capability.

missile is surface launched. that means that the launch vessel is within range of surface weapons - and if its a fleet, well within the capabilities of organic AEW&Cs for observation and thus well within the response range for CAP assets.
if it is Shkval based - then it has a severe range limitation - and that means that with reference to my prev, that it has to close the gap before launch. think about it, 6-8km range as opposed to CAP, or a naval 5" with up to 65km range with assisted munitions.
that it needs LOS for launch
that its designed for exploding on contact - that raises the opportunities for an effective defense. the fact that its a contact weapon more or less shows a lack of technical finesse as a bubble weapon would be more effective.personally, I'd have to say that although it looks impressive, when you start breaking down the capability and limitations then its far less intimidating.

The USN dropped supercav torpedoes some 15 years ago for a reason.

[alexsa]

What I have managed to look up on the "Squall" certainly matches GF's comments and I suspect his informaton sources are better than most.

http://www.periscope.ucg.com/mdb-smpl/weapons/minetorp/torpedo/w0004768.shtml


A 5km high speed short range noisy defensive system does not seem to match the claims put our by Iran (and published by the media). If the claimed 60km range Mk II had been deveoloped i wonder why it has not been seen in regular service by the Russians?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/shkval.htm


[Admin Edit: Please avoid linking to external discussion forums, alternative links for Shkval added]

[Scorpius]

maybe Iran is just ...bragging.to let the Americans know that they can put up a challenge if the US invades.

[Viper75]

...
that its designed for exploding on contact - that raises the opportunities for an effective defense. the fact that its a contact weapon more or less shows a lack of technical finesse as a bubble weapon would be more effective. ...

Hello, just a quick question: can you clarify what you mean by a "bubble weapon" here? Some type of proximity fuse (as opposed to a contact weapon)?

[LancerMc]

I doubt Iran has produced such a weapon, the U.S. Navy has been working this kind of weapon for years and as far in the public military domain not yet succeeded in producing such any close to what Iran claims.

The only thing the U.S. Navy has ever publicly acknowledged that has those types of capabilities is the SUBROC. That weapon was fired in the torpedo tube, a rocket lifts and flies it over water to the target where it then drops a nuclear depth charge on the target.

Personally I don't believe anything coming out Tehran. If I were president of Iran and I truly had a weapon capable of what they claim I wouldn't be telling anyone. I think this is just sabre rattling by Iran. It is just another claim to make the U.S. and it's Allies rethink about invading Iran.

To another point Iran must be claiming it can easily detect the lastest Western submarines. Though Iranian Kilo sub's due pose a significant threat in littoral warfare, but the USN is training hard to counter this threat. I think a more likely scenario that the U.S. Navy and it Allies would sink most the Iranian navy before it ever got a shot off no matter what weapon they claim to have.

*Thanks everyone for correcting my misspelling and adding some good information about the Shkval.*

[gf0012-aust]

Hello, just a quick question: can you clarify what you mean by a "bubble weapon" here? Some type of proximity fuse (as opposed to a contact weapon)?

A bubble torpedo =a torpedo designed to explode under the keel of a ship. The resulting air bubble lifts the vessel up and breaks its spine when it comes down.

a good example of this is the Mk48 footage seen on the web of the old HMAS Torrens getting torpedoed.

(its one of the most popular pieces of footage you see at sub warfare conferences - always guaranteed to pull a crowd. ;))

[hawa-ka-sipahi]

I believe its a Russian export weopon system (shkval-E),as i saw the video
clip of the firing ,as the report suggests that it was exported to China than China might have sold to Iran(just a sugestion!).the mk-48 torpedo has a range of 8 miles (without rocket boosting),than why the rocket propelled shkval has a lower range than mk-82 as squall has 6.6 times the speed of mk-48 or 4 times higher than other torpedoe types?

and what ever this system is................

MANY MANY CONGRATS TO IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!

[gf0012-aust]

I believe its a Russian export weopon system (shkval-E),as i saw the video

No its not. I've got clearer images of the Shkval from a Sub Warfare Conf I attended last year - it's nothing like it

the mk-48 torpedo has a range of 8 miles (without rocket boosting),

what? the Mk48 has approx 7 times the range (minimum) and its not rocket boosted anyway

than why the rocket propelled shkval has a lower range than mk-82 as squall has 6.6 times the speed of mk-48 or 4 times higher than other torpedoe types?

I guess the fact that an ASW screen is considerably larger than 7km hasn't occurred to the iranians.


The fact that its a surface mounted weapon also means that the launch platform is highly likely to be picked up by onboard AWACs from at least 300km - good luck closing to 7km
The fact that its a rocket means that it's not wire guided - and thus it's a snapshot weapon - that assumes that it can breach look down radar and GTMI systems which have a 300+km range. - again, good luck to the families of the crew if they think that they're going to breach a Carriers perimeter on a war footing.
The fact that it's a rocket means that it's also declaring where the launch platform is - acoustically thats the last thing you want to do.
It really is a weapon that will make those who don't understand weapons restrictions go "ooh and aah" - but for the serious - it aint that flash.
Fast, or fast-turning targets will be able to evade.
They're a blind shot weapon when fired (because they're moving at high speed through water it makes sonar impossible - this is the reason why torpedoes have a guidance wire)
They also blind the shooter, so the shooter will need to use radar if they want to track the target. Otherwise its a "hail mary" shot.
They're a "Hallmark" weapon - when you send it, everyone on the mail route knows where you are. ;)
They profess to be able to have a nuke warhead. (apart from the fact that this particular weapon can't be fired from a sub) The nominal but accepted "effective radius of effect" of an underwater nuclear explosion is circa 8km. This "weapon" has a range of approx 10km. Guess who's going to have their last command and get whacked by the after underwater after effects?
These things won't last 15 minutes in contested sea space - but against a tanker which can't get away. hmmmm one begins to wonder about tactical motive.
Super weapon - hardly. But all the kids will get excited.

[Viper75]

A bubble torpedo =a torpedo designed to explode under the keel of a ship. The resulting air bubble lifts the vessel up and breaks its spine when it comes down.

a good example of this is the Mk48 footage seen on the web of the old HMAS Torrens getting torpedoed.

(its one of the most popular pieces of footage you see at sub warfare conferences - always guaranteed to pull a crowd. ;))

Roger that gf, and thanks for your patience - how dumb of me not to get it! :drunk I am familiar with the type and the operating principles, just haven't seen the term bubble torpedo before (of course describes all modern anti-ship torps that I can think of). I guess this is because most of my contact with ASW/ASUW-related subjects has not been in english ;)

I agree re: Torrens SINKEX footage, the clip and the close-up pics are long-time favorites! I guess it must be one of the most widespread clip in navy circles. Btw, any idea what the white markings on the ship were used for? Aiming points? Optronic measurements of some type? Come to think of it I've seen them in other pics of SINKEX:es as well, but have (unfortunately!) never participated in one.

Getting back to the subject of the thread: what I fail to understand (this occurrence is common, sorry folks!) about the reported Iranian Shkval-type "wonder weapon" is: what would the Iranians use it for (except as propaganda aimed at uninformed politicians)? Especially if the weapon is surface launched. Do they (does anyone who knows US air power?) think they will ever get into launch range against any ships? What's the point if it is meant against US subs? Why would a US sub come even close to any Iranian surface units, since they can be taken out by air?

From what I understand about the real Shkval, it was intended by the Russians as a last-ditch snapshot weapon that an SSN that finds itself ambushed (by a quieter western sub) and suddenly detects an incoming torp on passive sonar can immediately either:
1) snapshoot the Shkval blindly at the torp bearing with the idea that the western sub even if at long range cannot ignore the shot and has to cut the guidance wire of her torp to be able to maneuver to evade the faster Shkval, while the SSN evades or
2) go active and hopefully detect the western sub close by followed by an "aimed" Shkval shot in the hope that the Shkval's speed will still allow it to impact before the incoming torpedo thereby cutting the wire (?) - or at least sinking the western sub as a retaliation while the SSN herself is sunk.

If the above is correct, and even if the "wonder weapon" was sub-launched, I can't see the relevance of any Shkval-type weapon for the Iranians, as in my opinion if hostilities break out, the Iranian Kilos will probably face:
1. "Hopefully but probably not" unprotected merchant shipping -> no need for the weapon, a conventional torp will do nicely
2. "Almost certainly" _massive_ MPA & helo ASW -> no use for the weapon at all (and maybe, _if_ they can get past the air searchers and get too close to a CVBG/SAG or protected convoy, then some surface ASW units -> still more effectively countered by a conventional guided heavyweight torp)
3. "Only in a very improbable, lucky situation" sub vs sub combat. If a Kilo meets an SSN (which would IMO probably be kept well offshore as Tomahawk launch platforms instead of very risky SSK hunting in the littoral) the Kilo would be the more potential ambusher! -> best done by guided ASW torp allowing the Kilo to keep its distance to hopefully stay undetected and guide the torp towards the SSN from a different bearing than her own.

So what's the point of Iran getting a short-ranged, super-fast & unguided underwater weapon?

[alexsa]

So what's the point of Iran getting a short-ranged, super-fast & unguided underwater weapon?

This is the trust of my orignail question: Is it all propaganda hyp by Iran? My gut feeling is that it was and judging by the comments to date it would appear to be the case. If you believe even a small propropation of the claims may by the republican guard then Iran have overtaken every other country in weapons development. I have a hard time swallowing that.

Admin Edit: Please avoid linking to external discussion forums, alternative links for Shkval added]

Sorry about that, got carried away with the discussion.

[alexsa]

Super weapon - hardly. But all the kids will get excited.

To take what GF said one step further a look at the math behind a rocket propelled unguided 360kph torpedo with a range of 7km suggests the rational behind its use is pretty poor. (I don’t claim to be an expert I am just looking at the apparent capability of the weapon)

For surface ships at 7km the gyro input into the weapon will need to be very accurate as every 0.5 degree error at that range will result in a 61m error down range. For longer ranges the error increases. This may not seem much of an error but where a largish ship is 250m long it can become significant if the gyro error is out by 1 (122m error) to 2 degrees and you combine any possible speed error.

Add to this the calculation of speed. For a warship at economic cruising (say 17 knots) a 5% error in speed will result in a position error in the order of 510m where the vessel is 7km away and the weapons takes 19 very noisy minutes to get there. If you are relying on radar tracking and the target is not playing ball by maintaining a very steady course and speed then speed error may be significant over these ranges and 5% may be realistic (even 10% if the target decides to use an aggressive zig zag). This is why torpedos are now guided, as you really need to get quite close to minimise the effect of such errors with an unguided shot. Fire such a weapon from 7km away the time and the noise would allow any alert target to step aside and call all goofers up on deck to watch it go by.

For submarines it gets more interesting. Bearing error is likely to be greater due to the quiet nature of the vessel and the fact you may be dealing with transient information (i.e. the occasional bearing) even after they have fired. Speed error may be reduced although event at 5 knots but unless the weapons is point black then it will still be a factor. More importantly you have to aim in three dimensions and take into account azimuth. The bearing and azimuth errors will be cumulative. It would not take much of an error to miss or much of a manoeuvre to dodge the shot.

Even where the weapon is fired in response to a discharge from a western submarine at reasonably close range this submarine will move after firing and accuracy will depend on the ability to calculate the direction and azimuth of such moves (they don’t have to be much) Even at 10 knots the sub will move 926m in three minutes. You assume a 5 knot speed and the sub does 10 you have 463m error in position.

As GF stated once this thing is fired the other sub knows where you are. Where “squall” is fired in response to a torpedo launch from another sub it would appear to have almost zero defensive benefit unless it hits, as it will provide excellent mid course guidance to the submarine that fired in the first place. Even if the wire broke the follow up snap shot will know where to go, worse still the as a result of firing “squall” you won’t know the second shot is coming.

[gf0012-aust]

Roger that gf, and thanks for your patience

Not a problem!

Getting back to the subject of the thread: what I fail to understand (this occurrence is common, sorry folks!) about the reported Iranian Shkval-type "wonder weapon" is: what would the Iranians use it for (except as propaganda aimed at uninformed politicians)? Especially if the weapon is surface launched. Do they (does anyone who knows US air power?) think they will ever get into launch range against any ships? What's the point if it is meant against US subs? Why would a US sub come even close to any Iranian surface units, since they can be taken out by air?

I suspect that its main potential is to be used as an overt threat against commercial/merchant shipping. If, and its a big if, they decide to threaten regional merchant shipping, then that means that the US and likeminded nations will be forced to start running escorts - as they had to do so years ago during the Iraq/Iran "tanker wars". That becomes a headache in confined waters. However, the advent of armed UCAV's like Predator/Hellfire combinations makes it all the more interesting. As a tactical weapon, I actually see minimal benefit for the Iranians.

From what I understand about the real Shkval, it was intended by the Russians as a last-ditch snapshot weapon that an SSN that finds itself ambushed (by a quieter western sub) and suddenly detects an incoming torp on passive sonar can immediately either:

In some circles thats referred to as a "hail mary" response

1) snapshoot the Shkval blindly at the torp bearing with the idea that the western sub even if at long range cannot ignore the shot and has to cut the guidance wire of her torp to be able to maneuver to evade the faster Shkval, while the SSN evades or

The launch vessel has still given away her position - at that point the chances that the enemy vessel will be dead from a counter attack is pretty good.

2) go active and hopefully detect the western sub close by followed by an "aimed" Shkval shot in the hope that the Shkval's speed will still allow it to impact before the incoming torpedo thereby cutting the wire (?) - or at least sinking the western sub as a retaliation while the SSN herself is sunk.

Except that the Iranian weapon is not sub launched. It does not look like the Shkval images that I have. It's a derivative if anything.

If the above is correct, and even if the "wonder weapon" was sub-launched, I can't see the relevance of any Shkval-type weapon for the Iranians, as in my opinion if hostilities break out, the Iranian Kilos will probably face:
1. "Hopefully but probably not" unprotected merchant shipping -> no need for the weapon, a conventional torp will do nicely

but the issue is one of symbolism more than practicality.

2. "Almost certainly" _massive_ MPA & helo ASW -> no use for the weapon at all (and maybe, _if_ they can get past the air searchers and get too close to a CVBG/SAG or protected convoy, then some surface ASW units -> still more effectively countered by a conventional guided heavyweight torp)

I think its more likely to be a UCAV in confined waters - USN policy is not to committ major capital vessels in confined waters anyway. Unless the Iranians "do a "Pearl") then the USN is unlikely to have majors in harms way.

In actual fact - the entire area could be monitored by one Global Hawk or 2 x Predators.

3. "Only in a very improbable, lucky situation" sub vs sub combat. If a Kilo meets an SSN (which would IMO probably be kept well offshore as Tomahawk launch platforms instead of very risky SSK hunting in the littoral) the Kilo would be the more potential ambusher! -> best done by guided ASW torp allowing the Kilo to keep its distance to hopefully stay undetected and guide the torp towards the SSN from a different bearing than her own.

The USN was committed in the cold war to trailing and hacking every sub threat - in an area of known volatility, I'd guess that they would be motivated to do something similar. Subs are the only naval weapons that are virtually at war 24/7.

So what's the point of Iran getting a short-ranged, super-fast & unguided underwater weapon?

I think it's more of an issue of symbolic defiance - and it's impressive for those who believe in those statements at face value.

Look at all their announcements in the last 2 weeks. They have made claims about weapons systems which when analysed very carefully are shown to be absolute misrepresentations. The average "reader" will get excited - and thats all they seek to achieve.

Cold hard military analysis of all their announcements, and analysing all those photos shows that they're telling very very big lies.

Although, I will give it to them that they've done some very very fast platform implementation. The Russians though are laughing all the way to the bank, they've sold them technology which in real terms is technically useless in the likely combat scenario envisioned - or is deliberately neutered.

The russians are the ones who've come out ahead. (and I think it is the russians as the chinese have no idea about WIG aircraft)

[LancerMc]

I think this whole thing has turned into one huge Public Relations campaign for Iran to scare the west into not invading. Even CNN has gotten onto the bandwagon of reporting some "Secret" missile tests in Iran's live fire exercises. If their secret no one would know about them. I don't doubt that they have some types of new weapons, but when you go to world news every day and say "look what we can do, and you can't." I think their lying through their teeth.

[Soner1980]

No I dont think that you are right. When Iran has built the Shahab-3 missile, why it is not possible to prode a smaller missile with a good guidance kit? Iranians are good in knock-off systems, ok I agree but this is what the knock-off productions (funny or not? video editing. :D Knock-Off Productions.com :D ) have has delivered enough information for a more advanced system production and integration.

Iran is not sleeping, Iran is not Iraq and Iran will fight when attacked. When Iran fights the PKK ( called PEJAK in Iran) terrorist in Iran near the border with Turkey, I have seen more than the outdated weapons that were of the 1970's production of the Soviet era.

The F-14 Tomcats are flying again, Iran has built spare parts and have also modernized them to use them. Zolfiqar-3 tanks built with M48 and M60 MBT's parts but it has something from the Abrams. Very scary things I have seen. They have also T-72 with must be taken serious.

That missile is real and must be taken seriously. But if you let me to place a joke, I will say: Just place explosive reactive armor on your boats and your boats will win :D

Greatings

[Big-E]

The F-14 Tomcats are flying again, Iran has built spare parts and have also modernized them to use them.

Built??? LMFAO, more like smuggled.

[norinco89]

Wow a super fast torpedo! Hopefully that thing got a 100km and guidance and could be fired from subs cause thats the only way u could fire that at US Carrier groups.

How they expect to get a rocket torpedo on a surface ship(platform which they lauched from) 20km(range of shyvll russian supersonic torp) away from US ship.
What a joke

their best sub is like a 20 year old kilo

their navy can maybe damage a ship at best

[Big-E]

Wow a super fast torpedo! Hopefully that thing got a 100km and guidance and could be fired from subs cause thats the only way u could fire that at US Carrier groups.

How they expect to get a rocket torpedo on a surface ship(platform which they lauched from) 20km(range of shyvll russian supersonic torp) away from US ship.
What a joke

their best sub is like a 20 year old kilo

their navy can maybe damage a ship at best

I agree with your assesment about attacking a US carrier in open waters but what if they try entering the Gulf? With the bottle neck at the straight of Hormuz this weapon used there could pose a serious problem not only to merchant traffic but any US ships that try to transit the straight.

[Soner1980]

If the US navy has good missile intercepting or torpedo intercepting system, it would be nothing. The missile torpedo's are fast and long ranged. Also it must have tech transfer from the Mother Russia. Iran has made slightly differences in its look and maybe used some parts of their own design. It is all possible.

The Iranians built also their own subs. The Kilo class? I don't know. The technics are obsolete, but are fresh from the factory.

[gf0012-aust]

If the US navy has good missile intercepting or torpedo intercepting system, it would be nothing.

There are a number of anti-torpedo systems in place. The Germans have an excellent torpedo based solution. The best defence is depth of intercept though.

The missile torpedo's are fast and long ranged.

No, they're fast and short ranged - its the same reason as to why the US abandoned cavitating torpedoes some 20 years ago. The Skval is estimated at 6-8km range - and there is no reason to suggest that this torpedo can go any further. Some fundamental design changes would be necessary.

Also it must have tech transfer from the Mother Russia. Iran has made slightly differences in its look and maybe used some parts of their own design. It is all possible.

Nobody is questioning the torpedos existence - they're querying the capability of the system. There is far more known about cavitating torpedoes than you think.

[Soner1980]

Maybe you are right, because I don't have much knowledge about torpedo's. I know much about tanks, armoring and guns. But the Iranian missile-torpedo or something was interesting when I saw on the TV. Maybe they have nothing, few US subs can sink all Iranian vessels or maybe it is like Galipoli that the Hormus is enough defended to pass like in 1915 the Galipoli that the attack succeeded when lost many vessels and after 3 times attack. We also had nothing to defend but tactics made it a graveyard. Many WW1 vessels are still in the bottom of the sea...

[Big-E]

Maybe you are right, because I don't have much knowledge about torpedo's. I know much about tanks, armoring and guns. But the Iranian missile-torpedo or something was interesting when I saw on the TV. Maybe they have nothing, few US subs can sink all Iranian vessels or maybe it is like Galipoli that the Hormus is enough defended to pass like in 1915 the Galipoli that the attack succeeded when lost many vessels and after 3 times attack. We also had nothing to defend but tactics made it a graveyard. Many WW1 vessels are still in the bottom of the sea...

If I remember my history the Ottomans had fairly decent weaponry at Gallipoli ie. machine guns artillery pieces. As the Ottoman Empire fell apart in Arabia with all the revolts the best equipment was left in defense of the Bosphorus. It was a tactical error by the Brits to try to take control of the Dardenelles when Russia was knocked out of the war so early. They didn't need access to the Black Sea, all they had to do was blockade it with a squadron of Dreadnoughts as the Ottomans had no real big gun battleships.

Comparing the straight of Hormuz to Gallipoli is interesting. Iran only controls one side of the straight for one. I'm sure if they see action coming they will mine the straight much like the Ottomans did the Bosphorus. They will have SSM batteries lined up on the coast. They will probably concentrate their naval power at this point because anything in more open waters will be cannon fodder. Backfires flying around might pose a problem if Iran has AS-4 Kitchen missles, if not then their not much of a threat. I think the major difference here is airpower. There really was no concept of air superiority at Gallipoli. Bombing the enemy meant nothing. If USN CBGs launch airstrikes against Iranian forces in the area of the straight most of their defenses will be crippled. U.S. subs would not be Irans problem here. US naval air-power would be the biggest concern to the Iranian navy. Every surface ship would be at the bottom in half an hour. The Iranian air force wouldn't dare attempt to interdict US strike elements. It would be suicide, I take that back, they might try. Iranian subs would be the only element to surivive the initial strike if they are deployed. The shipping channels of the straights aren't on the Iranian side but closer to Oman. Once they start passing Qeshm Island they might have a problem, the US marines would have to do an amphibious op to take it. This is where a comparison of the land atttack of Gallipoli would be made. Gallipoli was a peninsula that was able to resupply her troops and force a halt to the advance. Qeshm is an island that will not be able to reinforce once landings begin. Question is can the Iranians turn the island into an indomitable fortress? Considering they have open beaches the marines could land fairly easily at certain points. The highest elevation is around 700ft on the western half of the island so thats where the concentration of force would be most favorable for an Iranian defense. The hills of Shahab are the only defensable position, the town of Qeshm itself would fall in hours, its just too small for serious street to street fighting. I think the Iranians could hold out till the airstrikes were over, but they would have to start digging tunnels to prep for the invasion and play it like the Japanese in WWII. If Iran could inflict massive casualites that might turn public opinion against a full scale invasion of the Iranian mainland. But US forces could just forgo this option and wait for the island defenders to starve. Once SSM batteries have been destroyed and the naval surface contigent sits at the bottom of the Gulf the US has to run minesweepers to clear the straight. The only defense Iran can give is her submarine arm. The Persian Gulf is the last place you want to operate subs, its only 100-200ft deep. As out of date as Iranian subs are it shouldn't be too hard to find them. Gallipoli was a whole different ballgame.

[Soner1980]

Good story Big-E. The time has also changed since te WWI. Today 500 meters is nothing, then 500 meter was long distance for infantry. And I don't believe US air force will send human pilots. Why riking lives? Just put on the red button and the Tomahawk's will do the job. Tomahawk is able to bombard first and then it flies to their target to do Kamikaze. But Iran will use their old planes like it is a ballistic missile, suicide jets.

About the isles, it is not so important because they will fall first. US must be friendly with neighboring Turkish countries like Azerbaijan and others to surround them. As a Turk, attack is bad for Turkish economy and that Iran has nuclear warhead is also a threat. We are the big loosers what is always a dillema to Turks.

In Galipoli there was no air superioriy, they never heard of that word :D in 1915. But the Turks are known to fight with their bare hands and sometimes it was succesful because of the close combat techniques learnt by Turkish army school. The US must use Kuwait or IraQ as a base to invade Iran. But then, it is also hard for the US forces. Iraq was nothing, everyone wanted to kick Saddam out and lite fire crackers. I don't know what the new weapons systems of the US navy is. In several years the modern weapons we toght has been sold to allies like Turkey (OH Perry class frigates) and others and US have the better technologically supplied new ones for their own. Stealthy frigates, more destructive weapons.

But the missile topedo's is not sure of its existance, maybe it is bought by Iran and renamed. Iran also have Exocet type missiles and AS-4 or other AS-xx missiles wich are dangerous to all ships. Recently SA-15 Gauntlet SAM's wich they bought 30 of them are underway within 2 years. They don't say everything because China and North Korea will suppy everything and use it as a surpise attack. It is handy to compare Hormuz with Galipoli, because it can be the same end with the US. We had defended Galipoli to the final men. Iran will also do that. I think a new cold war will rise, this time East (Cina,Russia,Pakistan,Iran, North Korea and other Arab countries) and West (NATO, Israel, Japan, South Korea).

[Big-E]

Good story Big-E. The time has also changed since te WWI. Today 500 meters is nothing, then 500 meter was long distance for infantry. And I don't believe US air force will send human pilots. Why riking lives? Just put on the red button and the Tomahawk's will do the job. Tomahawk is able to bombard first and then it flies to their target to do Kamikaze. But Iran will use their old planes like it is a ballistic missile, suicide jets.

About the isles, it is not so important because they will fall first. US must be friendly with neighboring Turkish countries like Azerbaijan and others to surround them. As a Turk, attack is bad for Turkish economy and that Iran has nuclear warhead is also a threat. We are the big loosers what is always a dillema to Turks.

In Galipoli there was no air superioriy, they never heard of that word :D in 1915. But the Turks are known to fight with their bare hands and sometimes it was succesful because of the close combat techniques learnt by Turkish army school. The US must use Kuwait or IraQ as a base to invade Iran. But then, it is also hard for the US forces. Iraq was nothing, everyone wanted to kick Saddam out and lite fire crackers. I don't know what the new weapons systems of the US navy is. In several years the modern weapons we toght has been sold to allies like Turkey (OH Perry class frigates) and others and US have the better technologically supplied new ones for their own. Stealthy frigates, more destructive weapons.

But the missile topedo's is not sure of its existance, maybe it is bought by Iran and renamed. Iran also have Exocet type missiles and AS-4 or other AS-xx missiles wich are dangerous to all ships. Recently SA-15 Gauntlet SAM's wich they bought 30 of them are underway within 2 years. They don't say everything because China and North Korea will suppy everything and use it as a surpise attack. It is handy to compare Hormuz with Galipoli, because it can be the same end with the US. We had defended Galipoli to the final men. Iran will also do that. I think a new cold war will rise, this time East (Cina,Russia,Pakistan,Iran, North Korea and other Arab countries) and West (NATO, Israel, Japan, South Korea).

Well Iran will have to have portable platforms for their SSMs b/c all fixed positions will be bombed. These launchers will have to be well hidden from survellience platforms for them to survive airstrikes. I think as long as the US can blow the Iranian navy out of the water, neutralize SSMs and keep their airforce grounded then they can transit the straight without incident. This will making a ground assault of the ports around Hormuz less needed. But we are on the right track for the importance of the Straight. This has to be the most strategic point for Iran. They could essentially cut the worlds oil supply off by a third by sinking tankers, they could deny the US Navy the Gulf for operations and the transit of troops and supplies to Kuwait and forces in Iraq. It is a do or die situation for them and they would do like you say.

The point where you talk about taking Qeshm would aggrivate Turkish/US relations hits home. They wouldn't want an invasion, I was speculating if Iran opened fire on oil tankers like they did decades ago in the Tanker Wars then it might be needed. On this note as you are a Turk can I ask in your opinion would Turkey help the U.S. if they offered a big economic/military deal??? I remember when US invaded Iraq in 2003 and the Turkish government was leaning to take the offer but then switched sides on the issue. Would Turkey be willing to put troops into Northern Iran to help control Kurdish uprisings?

[norinco89]

The main problem is Iran will supply nuclear material to terrorist and they will use it on the USA. This could result in a dirty bomb strike or even a nuclear weapon strike.(briefcase bombs if they exist or just bombs inside shipping containers.)

The US military is stretched thin but a all out assault on Iran is a piece of cake. Iran dont even match up to 1990 Iraq

[Big-E]

The US military is stretched thin but a all out assault on Iran is a piece of cake. Iran dont even match up to 1990 Iraq

True, but 1) could USA get such a large coalition against Iran as they had against Iraq. 2) The terrain of Iran is very different than the open deserts of Iraq. 3) Iran is many times the size and population of Iraq and 4) an insurgancy in Iran would make Iraq look like a cake walk.

[norinco89]

There is a anciet chinese philosphy. When you conquer a area you kill everybody.

[Soner1980]

Well people, Iran is not Iraq. In Iraq everybody wanted to see US tanks front of their windows. I read in a newspaper that an Iraqi civilian was first happy to see US troops and was so happy that he climbed at a us tank and gived all crew cold water. He told later, now I am in the resistance group and so far I have killed many Americans because they kicked my neighbours door and kicked every person out like they were dogs. This is scary. This is a story of one of the resistance members in Iraq.

And about the Turkish army that will play a role in South Azerbaijan, the northern province of Iran, I don't know, not with this kind amateur MP Erdogan. Erdogan had made a big mistake in 2003 to saying that Turkey will approve with the US plan instead of we will see what the parliament vote. But the Turkish parliament voted against the plan. Dumbish shit isn't it? And now US is against of the Turkish Army to operate in Northern Iraq for this reason. Again in Iran, Turkey don't say yes anymore because of the opposition party will vote against it.

There was also rumors that if Turkey sayed yes for the US plan in 2003, then the US will never leave Turkish soil and only with violence the US forces was able to leave. I don't know about this but I heard some people speaking in this way. Back to Iran, Iran has many times clashed with the bloody PKK terrorist (PEJAK called in Iran) in South Azerbaijan. They have killed many or arrested dozens of them and handed over to Turkey. Now Iran is also in Turkish side, or they will try to get on the Turkish side. And that Turkey will send troops to Northern Iran to control Kurdish uprisings, there are only few Kurdish people in Iran. Only 12 million spread over whole Turkey with 7 million at the south east side of Turkey and 12 million in North Iraq and Syria that will be some 25 million. The whole South Azerbaijan region is Azeri Turks so about 20 million and Turkey will fight for the safety of them if PKK will try to kill the Azeri Turks. PKK is not fighting for Kurdistan but only for it's existance with drug smuggling, stealing, and European support. Öcalan has been captured and it's over. Only Kurdish leaders in Iraq strives for independance now and then Turkey will invade Iraq. Remember that Iran has also supplied the terrorist group with rifles and AGS-17 weapons. Food, medicines, etc.. Turkey will not help Iran I think...

[gf0012-aust]

Back on track please folks.

Feel free to start another thread if compelled to carry on the other subject.

[rebellious]

it doesnt matter if they made it or got it from someone else, they have them.

[contedicavour]

Since we're talking about Iranian naval assets, do we have any news about the status of their new corvette/frigate programmes ?
Besides the 3 Kilo SSKs and a few obsolete small frigates, what do they have to oppose a potential UN fleet assembled in the Gulf ?

cheers

[Big-E]

it doesnt matter if they made it or got it from someone else, they have them.

I think it matters, if its Russian made its probably more capable, if it is indigenously designed I would write it off.

[Soner1980]

Why are some people thinking that the Iranians have incapable weapons when they madi it domestically? :confused: The Japanese had also less incapable and less quality equipment but the have burned the Americans on every isle.

When Hiroshima was nuked out, most of the island was in Japanese hands and they had just won the war till the Japanese saw the effect on nukes.

Ik have found some information about Iranian vessels.

here it is a whole list...I think it is not so much vessels. They must buy from abroad and built more ships soon.

Submarines
Kilo class (3)
SSI (3)
(not much subs)

Destroyers
none (BiG mistake !!!)

Frigates
Alvand class (3)

Corvettes
Bayandor class (2)

Missile Craft
Houdong class (10)
Kaman class (10)

(Good but must be reinforced)

Patrol: Coastal
Parvin class (3)

(Weak)

Patrol: Inshore
Zafar class (3)
China Cat (3)
PFI (35)
Hovercraft (14)
miscallenous small craft (200+)
(Good but must be reinforced)

Mine Layers
Hejaz LST (2)

(Take to much time to lay mines, must also be reinforced)

Mine Countermeasures
Shahrokh MSC (1)
292 MSC (2)
Riazi (2)

Amphibious
Hengam LST (4)
Iran Hormuz 24 LSM (3)
Fouque LSL (3)
LCT (3)
ACV (6)

Support
Kharg AO (1)
Bandar Abbas AO (2)
Delvar class (5)
Hendijan class (12)
AT (1)
Training Craft (2)

[Big-E]

Why are some people thinking that the Iranians have incapable weapons when they madi it domestically? :confused: )

B/c they have embargoes placed on key technologies and they only have a
$9b budget.

[Soner1980]

Yes $9b budget is a graet value. Especially when you do not pay your conscripts. US have a budget of $380b I guess but if I look to our army and US, for that price Turkish and US military have the same result in battle. I speak about training or like that. In Turkey there is a very small profesionals in the army and good as all military is conscript. It is known that Turkish instructors also train US cadets for the USAF and US instructors Turkish cadets for the TuAF. We have mostly the same jets and Turkey also produces spareparts for the USA and vice versa.

Don't be wrong, $9 billion is a large amount of money to train and equip your troops. I don't know where the $380billion is needed for is gigantic. European countries just have $10-45billion budget depending on country ofcourse. I don't think the US is spending money efficiently I gues because $380billion is Turkey's state budget in 2004. :confused: I believe that the US Armed Forces can deliver the same results with 50 or 75 billion dollars.

You can better explain to me if you know why $380b US defense budget against $45b from Germany.

And the embargo, huh I never know about it, at least it is like nothing because Iran is buying what he can from China, North Korea and Russia. Only EU countries does not sell critical systems.

[Big-E]

Yes $9b budget is a graet value. Especially when you do not pay your conscripts. US have a budget of $380b I guess but if I look to our army and US, for that price Turkish and US military have the same result in battle. I speak about training or like that. In Turkey there is a very small profesionals in the army and good as all military is conscript. It is known that Turkish instructors also train US cadets for the USAF and US instructors Turkish cadets for the TuAF. We have mostly the same jets and Turkey also produces spareparts for the USA and vice versa.

Don't be wrong, $9 billion is a large amount of money to train and equip your troops. I don't know where the $380billion is needed for is gigantic. European countries just have $10-45billion budget depending on country ofcourse. I don't think the US is spending money efficiently I gues because $380billion is Turkey's state budget in 2004. :confused: I believe that the US Armed Forces can deliver the same results with 50 or 75 billion dollars.

You can better explain to me if you know why $380b US defense budget against $45b from Germany.

And the embargo, huh I never know about it, at least it is like nothing because Iran is buying what he can from China, North Korea and Russia. Only EU countries does not sell critical systems.

The question was why I think a homemade weapon is unrealiable, b.c 9b doesn't leave much for R&D after paying everything else off. As far as explaining the US Defense budget in FY2006, it will be $419.3 billion dollars. This is why American weapons are reliable b/c they spend huge amounts to make sure they and those who operate them work. Germany has a great little military, well trained and well armed but they don't really have a navy. If we compare deployable capabilities the US beats them by a factor of 10. Which means the US actually gets a better bang for their buck.

If the U.S. dropped funding to even 75 billion they would go the way of the Russian military. We all know that story.

The embargo is another reason I find these weapon systems to be unreliable, look at who they are buying the tech from. Countries that don't spend alot on R&D, my point... It's good to be in the Western crowd if you want high/tech quality weapons.

[Soner1980]

Good story Big-E. But I tought the $9b was only the army itself and not the whole ministery of defense. Turkey spends 12,5 billion US dollars only for the Armed Forces self, about 30 billion to produce, purchase and for R&D doeings. Also Turkey has now 25% selfsuffiency to produce itself. The 75% is procurement from abroad. Direct exports are faster to get weapons with 1st class tech on it.

But I thought also that Iran spends $9b for the army, and the purchasing of weapons or research is from another budget. But this is my opinion, I can be wrong.

The US is spending about $420b for the whole defense you said. Yes you are the 'rich boys' and have plenty of everything :D . 8000 Abrams, 2000 jets 130 vessels, 100 subs. And ability to launch the thousands of tomahawk missiles in one month.

Germany and the whole EU countries have decided to have small but ultra modern, highly trained military personel wich will cost less when you have a lot of army personell with standard training like China.

The Iranians, I don't know about their training and equipment. But it seems like 'childerens toys'. My mama give such toys when I was 5 years old :D . If you see in a Iranian parade, you see tanks on carrier trucks and not driving. Are they real? The missiles what they talk about are green or pink colored. It is like plastic and not what I can believe. But why they have a big mouth? They rely on something but what can it be? It just makes easier the the US when attacking because US thinks Iran is strong and with a surprice Iran has nothing in the front.:D Cake walk I think. or a small stone on a train rail...

[Scorpius]

I admire them though.Whatever Iran achieved after the revolution and the stupid hostage taking is amazing with all the restrictions and embargoes.

[Big-E]

Good story Big-E. But I tought the $9b was only the army itself and not the whole ministery of defense. Turkey spends 12,5 billion US dollars only for the Armed Forces self, about 30 billion to produce, purchase and for R&D doeings. Also Turkey has now 25% selfsuffiency to produce itself. The 75% is procurement from abroad. Direct exports are faster to get weapons with 1st class tech on it.

But I thought also that Iran spends $9b for the army, and the purchasing of weapons or research is from another budget. But this is my opinion, I can be wrong.

The US is spending about $420b for the whole defense you said. Yes you are the 'rich boys' and have plenty of everything :D . 8000 Abrams, 2000 jets 130 vessels, 100 subs. And ability to launch the thousands of tomahawk missiles in one month.

Germany and the whole EU countries have decided to have small but ultra modern, highly trained military personel wich will cost less when you have a lot of army personell with standard training like China.

The Iranians, I don't know about their training and equipment. But it seems like 'childerens toys'. My mama give such toys when I was 5 years old :D . If you see in a Iranian parade, you see tanks on carrier trucks and not driving. Are they real? The missiles what they talk about are green or pink colored. It is like plastic and not what I can believe. But why they have a big mouth? They rely on something but what can it be? It just makes easier the the US when attacking because US thinks Iran is strong and with a surprice Iran has nothing in the front.:D Cake walk I think. or a small stone on a train rail...

I think making the comparison of Turkey and Iran proves my point. Turkey has a good professional and very capable military. Why? Because they are partners for peace with the US and EU, they have access to the best equipment and training the world has to offer and they take it. Iran has chosen to get their equipment and doctrine from nations who are decades behind and have little experience in high-tech warfare. This is where my opinion lies, only seeing Iran use these weapons succesfully would change my opinion.

[Big-E]

I admire them though.Whatever Iran achieved after the revolution and the stupid hostage taking is amazing with all the restrictions and embargoes.

My view is that it is mostly propoganda. The Iranian military, whatever they may boast, hasn't made much progress since the Iran/Iraq war. The equipment sits in a constant state of disrepair. Their solution, say for example tanks, is to canabalize parts so others can run but nothing is new or improved. All the domestic production of parts and equipment were systems that were utilized 30 years ago.

[Big-E]

Getting back to this torpedo, What is the utility of such a weapon? It has a range of 3-6km. What is the point??? They might as well take a 63cm torpedo, attach a rocket booster to the back and let it fly through the air for awhile. At least they would give it some range. Using a rocket motor underwater is just stupid due to the friction of the water slowing inertia.