This is a discussion on Iran anti ship torpedo/missile, fact or fiction within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; The article below appeared on an online defence page found at:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publ...cle_005444.php
My gut feeling is that Iran is providing ...
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.
Last edited by WebMaster; April 4th, 2006 at 12:28 PM.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
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.
________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
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?
...[*]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)?
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.*
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. )
________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
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?
. 
