The Situation With Iran and the Strait of Hormuz

Persian Gulf

New Member
US Iran: what shooting down a $110 mn drone tells us about Iran's military - CNN

""They work," said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and North Africa editor at Jane's Defence Weekly, of Iran's air defenses. The incident "highlights that when the Iranians really make investment, it can really count," he told CNN.

"We knew that with ballistic missiles, but it appears the case with air defenses too."

Janes concluded the strike was likely from a mobile vehicle, given the US contention the missile was launched from 70 kilometers away, and there is no Iranian facility matching that location. In short: Tehran took out a US spy drone from the back of a fancy truck.

Binnie said the Iranians had either bought or developed radar technology that had helped them improve targeting at a distance. "We do not really understand how these guidance systems are working," he said."


The benefit of making indigenous radars and SAM systems is that people don't understand them. In fact, the US even claimed Iran used S-125 to shoot down the RQ-4 (Iran doesn't even have S-125!).

What I find most funny is last week Iran unveiled new 15th Khordad SAM system, and US special rep to Iran Brian Hook said it was "propaganda". I wonder what he thinks now. :)
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Note also that you confuse state responsibility with individual responsibility of government officials etc.
No he does not. He specifically mentioned Judges as another example of sovereign immunity within US jurisdiction in addition to that of the Federal State. Judges are not government officials but members of the Judiciary, the 3rd Branch of the Sovereign State alongside the Executive and Legislature.
 

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
Remember we’re not talking about the intercept of a 5th gen fighter, but instead the slow flying non stealth aircraft the size of a Boeing 737. Not especially a representative target for anyone Advaced systems to successfully engage.
 

Persian Gulf

New Member
Remember we’re not talking about the intercept of a 5th gen fighter, but instead the slow flying non stealth aircraft the size of a Boeing 737. Not especially a representative target for anyone Advaced systems to successfully engage.
Flying at 600km/h at 52,000ft altitude with a very comprehensive and expensive ESM suite.

They fired one missile - that was all it took!

But of course, this can't be equated with shooting down a F-22/F-35 (I see that you are very pessimistic and negative about Iran's capabilities in all of your posts, make sure you don't change your mind in the near future when Iran continues to surprise people like you).
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Flying at 600km/h at 52,000ft altitude with a very comprehensive and expensive ESM suite.

They fired one missile - that was all it took!
RQ-4 Global Hawk > U.S. Air Force > Fact Sheet Display


Intelligence aircraft such as Global Hawk are designed to do a job that has a man in the loop, but not on-board. This was done to remove the weakest link (humans), & their need for oxygen, food, rest & the bathroom !

The RQ-4 is slow - 360 Kts is slower than a commercial airliner (even twin engined turboprops !) & the blurb in the link above states its slower than that ! However, the task being undertaken is to fly in a fixed pattern over territory & gather intelligence in the form of comms & radar emissions / data, using the ESM suite. While necessary to gather intelligence, is mundane & boring. This slow flight / fixed pattern means that your average high school student could do the maths & plot the track (it's not rocket science).

With this information & a rocket with a heat signature seeker head, you simply do the trigonometry, point the missile in the general direction, possibly feed it some radar plot information & let the heat seeker take over terminal guidance to destroy the aircraft. (flying at height above 40,000 to 60,000 feet will make the engines appear red hot to such a seeker head, especially due to the exhaust / vapour trails). Short of having a proper defensive aids suite (flares / chaff / etc.), the aircraft has no real defence against such a simple missile.

It is inevitable that such things happen, but that is the price that has to be paid.
 

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
RQ-4 Global Hawk > U.S. Air Force > Fact Sheet Display


Intelligence aircraft such as Global Hawk are designed to do a job that has a man in the loop, but not on-board. This was done to remove the weakest link (humans), & their need for oxygen, food, rest & the bathroom !

The RQ-4 is slow - 360 Kts is slower than a commercial airliner (even twin engined turboprops !) & the blurb in the link above states its slower than that ! However, the task being undertaken is to fly in a fixed pattern over territory & gather intelligence in the form of comms & radar emissions / data, using the ESM suite. While necessary to gather intelligence, is mundane & boring. This slow flight / fixed pattern means that your average high school student could do the maths & plot the track (it's not rocket science).

With this information & a rocket with a heat signature seeker head, you simply do the trigonometry, point the missile in the general direction, possibly feed it some radar plot information & let the heat seeker take over terminal guidance to destroy the aircraft. (flying at height above 40,000 to 60,000 feet will make the engines appear red hot to such a seeker head, especially due to the exhaust / vapour trails). Short of having a proper defensive aids suite (flares / chaff / etc.), the aircraft has no real defence against such a simple missile.

It is inevitable that such things happen, but that is the price that has to be paid.

Correct, ESM for gathering SIGINT and ECM or other type of defensive counter measures are significantly different
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Perhaps Iran wants to export the Khordad 3 system with the Sayyard sd2c missiles ,not sure that it presents as any improvement over comparable systems
 

Preceptor

Super Moderator
Staff member
You think if you make threats I will think you know what you're talking about?
Three key points. The first is that anything using the terms "stealth" or "anti-stealth" is about marketing, since the terms used are Low Observable or LO, which is a point raised in the post A brief history of LO that you have already been referred to and advised to read along with Airpower 101. Both posts were made with input from members who are defence and/or defence industry professionals with relevant experstise from a number of different nations, spanning several continents across the globe.

The second is that ESM does little to increase the difficulty in engaging a target, since it generally means Electronic Support Measures, it is Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) which can make achieving a successful engagement more difficult.

The third and final point is that members of the Moderator team don't make threats. We advise members whose posting falls short of the Forum Rules and generally expected behavior of the forum, either due to the member's behavior of the content of the post itself and if need be take action. So far, you managed to have issues meeting expectations with both posting behavior and content. Should the problematic behavior continue, either by trolling, attempting to troll, or posting content which is or resembles propaganda, then further action will be taken.
-Preceptor
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
^^ Many thanks to everyone for preventing a thread derail and providing the needed guidance for the newbie. Over the years, as I learn more about defence from other members my opinion has slowly shifted (from a blind consumer of news to thinking more deeply about our geo-political future). 12 to 15 years ago, I used to believe in the so-called analysis presented by news outlets, which often is coloured by a lens (that at times lack objectivity or the willingness to speak truth-to-power). But over time, in the last 5 to 10 years, I have learnt that the news cycle (or Iranian propaganda) is not useful as a lens to review developments.
Correct, ESM for gathering SIGINT and ECM or other type of defensive counter measures are significantly different
Agreed.

Several international airlines said that they had diverted flights to avoid some of the airspace over the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman, where Iran shot down a US Navy RQ-4 Global Hawk. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warning came as Lloyd's of London warned of increasing risks to maritime shipping in the region. The FAA is advising US carriers and commercial operators not to fly over the Persian (Arabian) Gulf. The warning, which was relayed by US diplomatic posts, is due to concerns that the US troops operating in and around the Persian Gulf could misidentify passenger aircraft for hostile military aircraft. The FAA’s advisory on airliners operating over the Persian Gulf comes amidst rising tensions between the United States and Iran even before the Iran shot down an unmanned US Navy RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance aircraft, (escalating an already tense situation in the Strait of Hormuz).

Reacting to the announcement of airlines to reroute their flights over Iranian space, Mark Martin, aviation expert and founder of Martin Consulting, said the ticket fares would go up by at least $300 to $400 and flying time would increase by more than one hour. This was a stark reminder of the 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over eastern Ukraine, in which 298 people were killed. Five years after the Kuala Lumpur-bound flight was shot down, Dutch prosecutors named four suspects Wednesday believed to be responsible for the incident — an announcement that served as a reminder of the risks of operating flights over conflict zones.

While I am interested in the technical capabilities of the various indigenous radars made by Iran, the three basic requirements of an IADS (as explained in AirPower 101) are as follows:

(a) find enemy targets (like aircraft and cruise missiles) using long-range surveillance radars; to use Target Acquisition Radars (TARs) to enable the enemy aircraft or cruise missiles to be located with enough accuracy to allow it to be fired on;

(b) taking the data from long-range surveillance radars and/or TARs, and using the C4I to direct your defensive platforms to attack enemy targets and at this stage, it is not uncommon to use a type of radar system called a Fire Control System (FCS), or sometimes called an illuminator, to direct radar guided surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) towards enemy aircraft, cruise or ballistic missiles. These defensive platforms include fighters conducting DCA missions, SAMs of various ranges and AAA; and

(c) do not let the defensive platforms attack your own forces. Therefore, de-confliction is a key aspect of an IADS (or avoidance of fratricide). Think of IADS as a series of concentric defensive circles; the outermost might be assigned to fighters on DCA; next SAMs of various ranges; and finally AAA. The C4I system must not only provide the defenders with a common operating picture, it must also provide both blue force tracking and airspace management (so the the air bases being defended can continue to launch fighters).
Thus far, I have no idea of Iranian capability to de-conflict their own air space and conduct air to air intercepts with fighters instead of firing a missile into a sky potentially crowded with civilian aircraft.
...They fired one missile - that was all it took!

But of course, this can't be equated with shooting down a F-22/F-35.
If there is a single loss of American life in a shoot down of military planes, the US response would be different.

In contrast to the trigger happy Iranians, it is common for Japanese F-15Js and Taiwanese F-16Cs to intercept intruding aircraft that enter their air space with a total force package to escort the intruding aircraft out of their airspace that includes AWACs (with armed over-watch or a covering force to provide over match). Taiwan and Japan face more complex multi-aircraft scrambles for frequent air-space intrusions (especially the PLA testing of the Japanese ADIZ). So while there is some tension in NE Asia, these tensions between these neighbours are being risk managed to avoid escalation.
Persian Gulf said:
(I see that you are very pessimistic and negative about Iran's capabilities in all of your posts, make sure you don't change your mind in the near future when Iran continues to surprise people like you).
It’s not about being negative. We just don’t buy into Iranian propaganda.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
I thank all of you for the encouragement in responding to my posts and giving me an opportunity to learn from you.

For a CSIS backgrounder, see: Oil Markets, Oil Attacks, and the Strategic Straits

IMHO, Iran’s actions ultimately hurt its citizens more than it hurts the world. Their revolutionary guard have caused the War risk premiums that ship owners pay each time they go to the Persian Gulf have now surged to at least $185,000 for supertankers, according to people with knowledge of the market. They rose to $50,000 after the attacks a month ago. The Joint War Committee, a group that advises insurers, designated the entire Persian Gulf and waters just outside it a so-called Listed Area after the incidents a month ago. The classification gives underwriters room to charge more. Owners were reluctant to send vessels to the region while there was also a dearth of cargoes, according to traders and shipbrokers involved in that market, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The EU exported over €10.8 billion worth of goods to Iran in 2017 (see: Iran - Trade - European Commission). This means freight and insurance rates goes up - which will be for the short to medium term for the Persian gulf region (and affecting the world oil price) but these freight and insurance rates are likely to remain high for the long term for shipments into Iran. According to the EU, China, the United Arab Emirates,and the EU are now Iran's main trading partners, accounting for 19.5%, 16.8% and 16.3% respectively.

Learning their lesson from the Tanker Wars, Saudi Arabia has announced several mega-projects along the Red Sea, including a US$500 billion business zone shared with Egypt and Jordan as well as a luxury tourism destination. Saudi Arabia has also invested in infrastructure at the Red Sea Gateway Terminal (RSGT) under a privately funded BOT (Build and Transfer) development project in Saudia Arabia, with investment of US$700m. This investment will enable Saudi Arabia’s terminal to handle three vessels simultaneously and ensuring that their domestic economy is less affected by the increase in the War risk premiums. The Red Sea also includes the Bab Al-Mandeb strait, through which oil is shipped towards Europe, the US and Asia. In recent years the waterway has been targeted by Iranian-backed Houthi militants from Yemen. Despite the use of armed drones to attack pump stations on a pipeline that transports oil from the Eastern Province to Yanbu port on the Red Sea, these attacks caused only minor damage - which means Saudi Arabia’s oil exports from the Red Sea remains unaffected. Ultimately, the religious and ideological differences between the Persians and Arabs (and the US on the side of Saudi Arabia) are fundamental. These tensions can be managed by negotiations and can never be really solved. The Iranians through its proxies are committed to pushing US out from the Persian Gulf, whereas the US military is determined to stay put—a cold war between the two, which has the potential to go hot, is becoming the negative organizing principle of geopolitics in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps tried to capture the British Heritage, as the tanker was sailing through the Strait of Hormuz with escort from HMS Montrose. BZ to HMS Montrose for successfully deterring an attack (with no shots fired). See Iranian boats attempt to storm British oil tanker in the Gulf | Daily Mail Online
No he does not. He specifically mentioned Judges as another example of sovereign immunity within US jurisdiction in addition to that of the Federal State. Judges are not government officials but members of the Judiciary, the 3rd Branch of the Sovereign State alongside the Executive and Legislature.
Thanks.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Ok I'm making a single thread to discuss the recent developments. Please keep in mind the rules. This not a newsfeed for spamming videos and article links, and this is not a political forum, it's a defence and military forum. So, without further ado;

An Iranian oil tanker was seized by the UK, allegedly on request from the US, for violating sanctions in supplying oil to Syria. In response to this Iran seized two UK tankers one after another (one of them has already been released with a warning for violating ecological and shipping rules, the other is being held with it's crew of 23). There have also been several flyby's of US warships by Iranian aircraft, with the US claiming it downed an Iranian drone, but Iran denying losing any aircraft. Evidence of the downing is currently not public. A third tanker, British Heritage, was protected from seizure by a british warship, the F226 Montrose. A photo from a helo is in the first link.

As a reminder, this all takes place after a shoot down of a US UAV by Iran in what may or may not have been Iranian airspace (the two sides differ) earlier.

Британский фрегат F226 Montrose препятствует атакам катеров КСИР на танкер British Heritage
Захват супертанкера Grace 1
Иран арестовал британский танкер Stena Impero
Иран арестовал супертанкер "Mesdar"
Коротко по ситуации с британскими танкерами
Не сбили?
Белый дом имеет "явные доказательства" того, что США сбили иранский беспилотник, угрожавший их кораблю
На борту задержанного в Иране танкера находятся трое россиян. Команду продержат на судне до конца расследования

EDIT: Footage of Iranians landing on the Stena Impero tanker.

Высадка иранской абордажной группы на танкер Stena Impero с вертолета Ми-171Ш
 
Last edited:

At lakes

Well-Known Member
Iran tanker crisis: MI6 probe link to Putin after British ship is seized

I don't know reliable the Mirror is but they are reporting, see attached link, that the Iranians are bending GPS signals and the Stena Impero sailed into Iranian waters still thinking it was in International Waters. The article suggests that the technology may have had its origins in Russia and GCHQ and MI6 are investigating. How they got that info escapes me. I don't know if its possible to bend such signals as the article suggests, perhaps someone with more tech knowledge than I could offer some suggestions.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Iran tanker crisis: MI6 probe link to Putin after British ship is seized

I don't know if its possible to bend such signals as the article suggests, perhaps someone with more tech knowledge than I could offer some suggestions.
GPS spoofing is not new. All it needs is a stronger fake signal, more or less analogous to any jamming scheme. There are reports of devices as small as an iphone, so a suitably located drone and small payload could wreak havoc. As it takes 4 different satellites to provide a position, faking one should be all it takes.

The military uses encrypted signals from the GPS constellation to ensure they're not triangulating bogus data. Non military users need to have a proper backup mechanism. Sextants, bearings and charts anyone?

oldsig
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Iran tanker crisis: MI6 probe link to Putin after British ship is seized

I don't know reliable the Mirror is but they are reporting, see attached link, that the Iranians are bending GPS signals and the Stena Impero sailed into Iranian waters still thinking it was in International Waters. The article suggests that the technology may have had its origins in Russia and GCHQ and MI6 are investigating. How they got that info escapes me. I don't know if its possible to bend such signals as the article suggests, perhaps someone with more tech knowledge than I could offer some suggestions.
The Iranians have said that the ship was in international waters when they boarded it and they arrested it for breaking international law. However it was also claimed by MSM here that the ship was in Omani waters at the time of the boarding. Being MSM, at least they got it in the right hemisphere.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
GPS spoofing is not new. All it needs is a stronger fake signal, more or less analogous to any jamming scheme. There are reports of devices as small as an iphone, so a suitably located drone and small payload could wreak havoc. As it takes 4 different satellites to provide a position, faking one should be all it takes.

The military uses encrypted signals from the GPS constellation to ensure they're not triangulating bogus data. Non military users need to have a proper backup mechanism. Sextants, bearings and charts anyone?

oldsig
Yet the Norwegians claimed that Russia managed to mess with their GPS during a military exercise... would that indicate something more than the simple scheme you're describing? Also could a jammed or faked GPS signal be responsible for the US drone actually ending up in Iranian airspace without the US realizing it?

Norway accuses Russia of jamming its military systems

EDIT: An Iranian tanker was released by Saudi Arabia. It broke down near Saudi Arabia earlier and was taken to a Saudi port but was subsequently charged a 200 000 dollar bill for one day in port, and was allegedly held for debt. Reports are that the debt is now paid, but I can't help but wonder, with this sort of timing, if perhaps the Saudis were worried that one of their tankers would be next, and decided to release the ship.

Саудовская Аравия отпустила иранский танкер, находившийся с мая в Джидде
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
It would be very significant if a sophisticated US drone could be lured away without the US being aware of this.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I worry about the insipid response by the UK govt over this seizure. It seems that HMS Montrose was not allowed or unable to take any real action. The deployment of extra ships will not help if Commanders are politically constrained.
It’s a reminder of the Iranian capture of the RN RHIB a few years ago where no resistance was allowed.
Platitudes and sanctions will not keep the maritime traffic safe, it requires immediate action and local commanders should have the appropriate ROEs
 
Top