Iran says tests missiles able to sink "big warships"

[SS_Charlemagne]

Iran says tests missiles able to sink "big warships"

Iran's Revolutionary Guards test fired missiles in wargames on Thursday which a commander said could sink "Big warships" in the Gulf, Sea of Oman and the north of the Indian Ocean, the state broadcaster said.


Iran is at loggerheads with the United States over its disputed nuclear programe and what Washington calls its meddling in Iraq. The United States has ordered a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf to step up pressure on Iran. (Reuters)

http://www.ynetnews.com/home/0,7340,L-3083,00.html

[Highsky]

Iran successfully test fires land-to-sea missile

8 February 2007

TEHERAN - Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards successfully test-fired on Thursday a land-to-sea missile with a range of about 350 kilometres (210 miles), state television reported. The firing came on the second day of war games by the Guards’ air force and naval divisions amid mounting tensions with the West over Iran’s nuclear programme.


“We have successfully test fired a cruise missile called SSN4, or Raad, hitting targets 300 kilometres (180 miles) away in the Sea of Oman and northern Indian Ocean,” deputy air force commander, Ali Fadavi was quoted as saying.

“This missile has the final range of 350 kilometres and can hit all kinds of big warships in all of the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman and northern Indian Ocean.

“It can carry a 500 kilo (1,100 pounds) warhead and can fly at low altitude, evading radar jammings and immune to electronic measures.”
Iranian television showed footage of the missile being fired and hitting its target.

In January 2004, then defence minister Ali Shamkhani said Teheran would proceed with production of a new line of Raad missiles to be deployed in the Gulf region.

The Guards on Wednesday successfully test-fired a new Russian-made air defence missile system, whose delivery last month sparked bitter US criticism.

TOR-M1 surface-to-air missiles were shown being fired from mobile vehicle launchers and successfully taking out their targets.

In 2005, Teheran and Moscow signed a contract for the purchase of 29 TOR-M1 missile systems estimated to be worth 700 million dollars (540 million euros).

The United States had urged Russia to cancel the sale, saying it was a mistake when the UN Security Council had imposed sanctions against Iran’s ballistic missile industry as part of measures against its nuclear drive.

Iran’s leaders have repeatedly said the country’s armed forces are ready for any eventuality in the current standoff with the West over its nuclear programme.

Although the United States has said it wants the standoff solved through diplomacy, Washington has never ruled out military action to thwart Iran’s atomic drive.

The United States accuses Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon. Teheran vehemently denied that, insisting its atomic programme is peaceful in nature
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2007/February/middleeast_February113.xml&section=middleeast&col=

[PJPM]

the longer the range the better it is, meaning eighter us ships will get hit or they have to move further back meaning aircraft carriers can't do much agianst iran.

[crod]

are these mobile sites or can they stationary? if the latter applies cant they be taken out?

[burster]

Crod,

Given that the combat radius of an armed superhornet is 500 or so miles, and the range on these new missiles is below 500 miles, the launcher sites can be targeted before the ships come into range.

are these mobile sites or can they stationary? if the latter applies cant they be taken out?

[Azarakash]

Fantastic!! burster, you're dumb. A 500 mile radius means it can only fly 250 ONE-WAY. Shut up and honor this great achievement.

[burster]

Azarakash,

Uh, no Azarakash, that is not what it means. Combat radius means it can fly that far before it has to fly back. Radius is half the distance across a circle.

Here is a url.

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtomakewar/databases/warplanes/radius.asp

Normal Combat Radius represents how far, in kilometers, the aircraft can normally travel from its base and perform it's mission (air superiority or ground attack) The rule of thumb is that the combat radius is one third the distance an aircraft can fly in a straight line on a full load of fuel.

Oh, and before calling someone dumb, you might want to remember what Confucius said:

"Better to keep one's mouth shut, and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt."

:-)

Fantastic!! burster, you're dumb. A 500 mile radius means it can only fly 250 ONE-WAY. Shut up and honor this great achievement.

[mo*]

Guys don't forget that the latest Fajr with multiple warheads and a range of 1000+ miles could be used against aircraft carriers

[burster]

Mo,

got a source to back up that assertion? Got any sources at all stating that they have a terminal guidance that allows them to be used against aircraft carriers? Any source that says they are operational, and not some prototype that is years from deployment? Anything at all besides your own opinion?


Guys don't forget that the latest Fajr with multiple warheads and a range of 1000+ miles could be used against aircraft carriers

[Amir]

Fantastic!! burster, you're dumb. A 500 mile radius means it can only fly 250 ONE-WAY. Shut up and honor this great achievement.

Respect members, Do not break rules of this forum.

[defender]

Its a mobile site so even fastest radars would definitely take time to locate them.
Any source that says they are operational, and not some prototype that is years from deployment? Anything at all besides your own opinion?

I dont think any military gives every infos about their weopons.
although Iran has test fired enough to prove it has a great no's of them.

[mujahid]

Does any body knows how many aircraft carriers does US has and how many jets could brought in?

[Alex]

Does any body knows how many aircraft carriers does US has and how many jets could brought in?

US has 12 aircraft carriers

[mujahid]

What prevents Iran against getting one. Russia, France and other countries have many old one to destruct. So Iran can get them for free, I guess

[burster]

mujahid,

If you want info on us carriers, including current status and locations, try

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/gonavy/atsugi/gonavy604.html

At any one time the US can put about 6 carriers on station in about a month, with another 2 a month later. Right now 1 is in RCOH (Refueling and complex overhaul), 2 are in DPIA (Docked Planned Incremental Availability). CVN-78, the Bush, will be delivered to the Navy in 2008, which is when the last non-nuclear carrier, the Kitty Hawk, will be decommissioned.

Of course, those are the big deck carriers with 75-85 aircraft, including 50 attack planes. The US also has 7 LHD and 5 LHA class ships which any other navy would call carriers. These are 40,000 ton amphibious warships that can carry helicopters, Harrier jump jets and a couple thousand troops.

Does any body knows how many aircraft carriers does US has and how many jets could brought in?

[Power_Serj]

Also once the F-35 VTOL is out, the amphibious craft will be able to hold them too!

[Tbagger]

Guys don't forget that the latest Fajr with multiple warheads and a range of 1000+ miles could be used against aircraft carriers
That is if you can find the carrier battle group.

[Power_Serj]

They better be able to carry 1 million bomblets, because Iranian SCUDs (also known as Shahabs) are as accurate as non-rifled muskets.

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=31412011af

In this video, the missile half-missed. Also, it doesn't appear to be sea-skimming, making it easier to track and shoot down.

[alopes]

Yes Mohmar it half missed but USA has a lot of bigger ships so the probability is that the missile will not miss the USA ships.

Yes Burster the Carriers could operate far from the missile range but the matter is that this missile can make a hell for the USA navy in the persian gulf and hinder US Navy operations in the region.
It is really another kind of War when both parties can shot the other in almost the same level.

Here is another link for the missile launch

Link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1yWjArzlPY


While the USA warships will have to defend themselves from cruise missiles the ballistic missiles will have an easier job of finding its land targets as USA bases and oil refineries in the region.

[Prinz Eugen]

Do we know the numbers of starters and missiles the Iranian military has, or is it unknown as most of the Iranian military capabilities?

[Sajjad]

Do we know the numbers of starters and missiles the Iranian military has, or is it unknown as most of the Iranian military capabilities?

It is not known.

[mujahid]

The missile didn't miss the boat. Actually, it should explode once detecting any material object on its neughborhood. I think Iranians made economy of one boat and one missile at the same time. The missile doesn't contain explosives I think.

[Behrooz Boonabi]

US has 12 aircraft carriers

An amazing wast of money.

[Alex]

The missile didn't miss the boat. Actually, it should explode once detecting any material object on its neughborhood. I think Iranians made economy of one boat and one missile at the same time. The missile doesn't contain explosives I think.

that's try cement was used instead of explosives. coz in tests normally they never use explosives.

[JEskandari]

They better be able to carry 1 million bomblets, because Iranian SCUDs (also known as Shahabs) are as accurate as non-rifled muskets.

Dear power serj you belive so more
how you say that PAC system are better than the original Pac systems
bt Shahabs cant be better than scuds
Its strange way of thinking

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

While the USA warships will have to defend themselves from cruise missiles the ballistic missiles will have an easier job of finding its land targets as USA bases and oil refineries in the region.
The USA don't have oil refineries in the region. Any hit on oil refineries on Iran's part will really piss off the country it's in.
Also, US warships will launch chaffs and smoke screens to make hitting them harder.

[iraniantiger]

usa hasent refinery!!!!?
where do u live
all refineries in thet arab countries are in usa hands
if iran attacked then all these refinery must be closed and then usa couldent achive his oil from this place and after 6 month he should end any war for his economy living

do u think that chaff and flaiers are usefull yet against advanced warheads of iranian cruise missles
how do they do against tv guided missles like kosar and fajre darya?

i think one shut of shahab missle is enough for destroing a refinery
and 1000 bomblets will cover all around an airport and then it should closed
how 2 or 3 patriots missles can defeat 1000 bomblet
or 5 200kg war heads in a shahab missle
think twise

[Bosnian]

Do we know the numbers of starters and missiles the Iranian military has, or is it unknown as most of the Iranian military capabilities?

I am interesting to know how did you choose that nick name “Prinz Eugen”. That was bloody killer that burned my city Sarajevo killing hundreds of innocent civilians. It is not nick name for honourable man.

Regarding a number of missile launchers, it depends of what you think launcher is. If that is special vehicle, the number is limited. But some missiles and rockets do not need special vehicles. I found this when I saw Iraqi insurgents firing rockets from ground without any device. Off course, that is not precise. But C-802 with included GPS just need probable direction and some surface to slip-on. That can be even wooden beam. Small civilian lorry can transport C-802 to seashore where wooden, plastic or cement launchers were made years ago. They get GPS coordinates and order to fire. They direct C-802 at probable direction and launch. GPS did the path correction, then active guidance was continued. Is this possible? There is no way to stop this. Iran, Syria, Hezbollah (or any other country) can make hundreds of such improvised launchers for artillery rockets or guided missiles and direct them to predefined targets. Any factory producing plastic gas tubes (you know a yellow one that are laid in ground) can produce one-time base launching tubes for artillery rockets. With some simple system they can be directed. One attachable aimer can be used for targeting. What if you find the launcher location? Nothing, it will already be destroyed by launching. I think Hezbollah used this tactic, based on pictures I found on the Internet, it used simple metal constructions as launchers, not using specialized vehicles.

After this possibility can yo tell me how many launchers Iran or Syria can have?

[alopes]

Mohmar - The USA don't have oil refineries in the region. Any hit on oil refineries on Iran's part will really piss off the country it's in.
Also, US warships will launch chaffs and smoke screens to make hitting them harder.

This situation, hit of oil refineries, will only happen, whem and if, USA starts a war by destroyng Iran structures with the full support of these same countrys that already said that Iran nuclear program is a threat to the region.
These "innocent" countrys are allowing USA bases on its territory to be used to threaten Iran, and in fact to be used to attack Iran.
These same countrys talk loud about an Iran "threatening influence in Iraq" while they keep quiet about USA own long term bases and colonization of Iraq.
So these "innocent witness" countrys in Persian Gulf are not innocent at all because they support USA pollicy of besieging, weakening and ultimately attacking Iran if that will fit their interests or envy about Iran Shiit independence.
If a war starts in the region, i think Iran will not bother to much about these "friends" piss of since these witness countrys don´t piss of about aggression against Iran and aggression against Shias in general.

But going back to the topic it is really good that Iran now is able to interdict Persian Gulf with these anti-ship missiles.

[JEskandari]

The USA don't have oil refineries in the region. Any hit on oil refineries on Iran's part will really piss off the country it's in.
Also, US warships will launch chaffs and smoke screens to make hitting them harder.

Chaffs and smoke screen are not that effective for defending a refinery it cant move and the target are always at the same place where they were ten years ago

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

Chaffs and smoke screen are not that effective for defending a refinery it cant move and the target are always at the same place where they were ten years agoRead my post again. If Iran hits an American-owned oil refinery in the region, it won't kill any Americans.

[Jadeite]

Read my post again. If Iran hits an American-owned oil refinery in the region, it won't kill any Americans.

Indeed, plus it'll create a lot of grudges among Iranian neighbors. Grudges that we'll gladly exploit to our advantage.

[JEskandari]

Indeed, plus it'll create a lot of grudges among Iranian neighbors. Grudges that we'll gladly exploit to our advantage.

Maybe iranian wont attack that instalation they only make the situation that some of that neighbour people which are not agree with the situation make the attack
wont forget nowadays everything happen in everyplace in the world there are some people who see iranian hand in it .

[Bosnian]

Iran may construct some kind of underwater vehicles which would move on the sea-bed caring cruise missiles? These vehicles do not necessary need to go far away, 5-7 km from seashore, that would be enough, just to protect missile location. Much cheaper would be to plant many specially built C-802 containers on the sea bed. They could be connected by tiny fiber-optic cable. On command they would get GPS coordinates, container would be realized to sea surface and C-802 launched.

Do you know why so few pictures from last war games have been realized? I never saw picture of Shahab 1-2-3 impact on the target, or cluster warhead action. Do you have some pictures of ballistic missile launching from ship, I think Iran tested this some time ago?

[Behrooz Boonabi]

Iran may construct some kind of underwater vehicles which would move on the sea-bed caring cruise missiles? These vehicles do not necessary need to go far away, 5-7 km from seashore, that would be enough, just to protect missile location. Much cheaper would be to plant many specially built C-802 containers on the sea bed. They could be connected by tiny fiber-optic cable. On command they would get GPS coordinates, container would be realized to sea surface and C-802 launched.

Do you know why so few pictures from last war games have been realized? I never saw picture of Shahab 1-2-3 impact on the target, or cluster warhead action. Do you have some pictures of ballistic missile launching from ship, I think Iran tested this some time ago?


I have seen video several times on this forum, I will look tomorow.

[Bosnian]

I thought about this:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/p_missile_salvo_2.jpg

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/yakhont_2.jpg

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/rockets_cruise.html


http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/navalmissile/yj88lg.jpg

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/navalmissile/yj88.asp


Why need submarines? Put them into sea-bed. Let's they think where they coming from...

[Yasin20]

if the war did start with iran and if iran did destroy the air craft carrier would it be more easier to fight america

[Bosnian]

I think the right question is if Iran can stop US Navy in the Gulf, and if it seriously show this possibility, will US attack in that case? All Iran military maneuvers in the Gulf are intended to show this. I am not sure Iran has any interest to start war since that will get serious destruction. So it try to make price high and every day it introduce new weapons just to make price higher and unacceptable. In a case of any war the aim will be destruction of Iran as state, the same what Iraq paid. The war with Hezbollah was intended to show how that destruction will function. Because of the action of one group complete Lebanon society was destructed. So the massage was that Iran will stay without factories, harbors, infrastructure, roads, dams, everything. The aim was to test Israel ability to survive retaliation also. Hezbollah rocket attacks were just small war game. For example, Serbs launched 10 000 grenades and rockets on the city of Sarajevo just in one day. Hezbollah launched 4000 in month on complete Israel. I saw personally when Serbs launched 100 shells just on one building in less then hour. It was built of betony and it survived but hardly damaged. Iran has really hard task if it want to survive. In that context we can expect they will use whatever they can. For sure they will try to sink some ships. Iran probably during years of preparation highly dispersed its forces. But its possibility to project large force at once is still not satisfactory. In a case of war it will be attacked by hundreds of missiles and other weapons per minutes. US will try to drop whatever it has in a matter of hours. Iran will be forced to do the same. If it base defense to retaliatory strikes, that would be like somebody kicks you and you throw rocks on his house window in order to retaliate. He will beat you to death before you do anything. So you must attack his military not his factories. This will be real WWII battle. I think US/UK/Israel are in much better position then Iran and if Iran wants to do anything it will must be able to launch enormous number of missiles in a matter of minutes. Remember, in a case of war, US troops in Iraq will not wait to Zel-zals to come. They will be removed in advance. They will probably start direct ground attack on Iran or Syria. They are well prepared armies with fighting experience. North Korea base its tactic on ability to launch 100 000 shells per hour. Iran must spent at least 1 million shells/rockets/missiles in first day of war. I think all calibers. I think Iran will attack first.

[JDAM]

This will help those individuals that think we may not have an anti-ship missle defense.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/1699m-for-support-of-phalanx-closein-ship-defense-guns/index.php

[Behrooz Boonabi]

This will help those individuals that think we may not have an anti-ship missle defense.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/1699m-for-support-of-phalanx-closein-ship-defense-guns/index.php

And here is a previosly posted clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1yWjArzlPY

As you can see, it comes down fast. This one did not have exposives though it was was probibly wieghted with cement for safty.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4871078.stm Hoot torpeedo, to fast to manuver against.

[Power_Serj]

Phalanx is the last line of defense. There are other anti-ship missile defenses. Also, this is not defense against torpedoes.

Do you really think that Iranian torpedoes and "stealthy super duper torpedoes" or something? Western torpedoes are much better just by accumulative knowledge of technology, and money put into torpedo programs. Iranian subs don't have a chance against subs of any Western country.

[JEskandari]

Phalanx is the last line of defense. There are other anti-ship missile defenses. Also, this is not defense against torpedoes.

Do you really think that Iranian torpedoes and "stealthy super duper torpedoes" or something? Western torpedoes are much better just by accumulative knowledge of technology, and money put into torpedo programs. Iranian subs don't have a chance against subs of any Western country.
Phalanx may be as good as is possible but it face the problem that the old versions of defense faced can it detect the incoming anti ship missile in time and answer in time .consider it that missile like sunburn move with the speed of 2.9 mach and fly between 1.5 to 3 meter above the water.
in fact under water they cant use radar they use sonar which have its deficiencies so they try to hear the presence of the sub and its the problem Iranian subs are of the most silent sub in the world so the adversary may only when know their presence when the torpedo has been released and with the speed of 270 km/s its very hard for the subs to out maneuver the incoming torpedo and then get a target and destroy it before the second torpedo being released.

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

in fact under water they cant use radar they use sonar which have its deficiencies so they try to hear the presence of the sub and its the problem Iranian subs are of the most silent sub in the world.I highly doubt that. The 212 A class have a hydrogen fuel cell power plant, which is way more silent than any diesel engine Iran might have.

[JEskandari]

I highly doubt that. The 212 A class have a hydrogen fuel cell power plant, which is way more silent than any diesel engine Iran might have.
i said one of the most silent not the most silent and in fact its the most silent diesel engine submarine.
and its what i found which one is what you mentioned
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type_212/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/ss-212.htm
American version is historical and there is no germane version in Persian gulf

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

Haha cool, didn't know the Americans also had an (SS) 212 during WW2.

[JEskandari]

Haha cool, didn't know the Americans also had an (SS) 212 during WW2.
maybe you know understand that two thing with the same name are not always the same

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

maybe you know understand that two thing with the same name are not always the sameYeah but I thought it was obvious that I meant the modern German one.

[JDAM]

There's no way it goes 233 mph under the water... the current alone would break it apart.

Iran had been known to throw in a little sarcasim... mybe be a little over exagerative if you will.

[JDAM]

in fact under water they cant use radar they use sonar which have its deficiencies so they try to hear the presence of the sub and its the problem Iranian subs are of the most silent sub in the world so the adversary may only when know their presence when the torpedo has been released and with the speed of 270 km/s its very hard for the subs to out maneuver the incoming torpedo and then get a target and destroy it before the second torpedo being released.

You said in the world turbo.

[tonahtiu]

Phalanx is the last line of defense. There are other anti-ship missile defenses. Also, this is not defense against torpedoes.

Do you really think that Iranian torpedoes and "stealthy super duper torpedoes" or something? Western torpedoes are much better just by accumulative knowledge of technology, and money put into torpedo programs. Iranian subs don't have a chance against subs of any Western country.

The wars are win by the most intelligent, no the more advance in technology

[JEskandari]

There's no way it goes 233 mph under the water... the current alone would break it apart.

Iran had been known to throw in a little sarcasim... mybe be a little over exagerative if you will.
its 270 km/s you can search for "hoot torpedo"
it has been done before that too look for "shkwal"
if american cant do a thing it wont mean its imposible

[JEskandari]

Yeah but I thought it was obvious that I meant the modern German one.
and no german one in persian golf yet

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

and no german one in persian golf yetHow would you know? They're silent :p

Also, Germany gave Israel Dolphin subs also equipped with hydrogen fuel cells.:err2:

[Prinz Eugen]

Also, Germany gave Israel Dolphin subs also equipped with hydrogen fuel cells.:err2:

Dont want to be a smart ***, but i realy think the israeli ones doesnt have hydrogen cells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

"Three Dolphin class submarines built for the Israeli Navy are of a similar design, but using conventional diesel-electric propulsion"

[Mohmar 'Deathstrike']

Dont want to be a smart ***, but i realy think the israeli ones doesnt have hydrogen cells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_212_submarine

"Three Dolphin class submarines built for the Israeli Navy are of a similar design, but using conventional diesel-electric propulsion"You're right. However there's this: The two new ships will be an upgraded version of the old Dolphins, and are going to feature an Air-independent propulsion system, similar to the one used on U214 submarines. On July 6, 2006, the Government of Germany decided to pay an advance to start the construction, about 170 millions euro. The two submarines will cost, overall, around 1.3 billion euros, of which one third will be paid by Germany.[2] The first one is scheduled to be completed in 2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_class_submarine

So they don't have them yet, but will get them in 5 years.

[Bosnian]

Iran�s Doctrine of Asymmetric Naval Warfare

By Fariborz Haghshenass
December 21, 2006


For more than a decade, Iran has lavished a considerable share of its defense budget on its naval forces (which consist of both regular and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps units), believing that the Persian Gulf will be its front line in the event of a confrontation with the United States. Following a naval war-fighting doctrine that suits its revolutionary ethos, Iran has developed innovative, asymmetric naval warfare tactics that exploit its favorable geographic situation, build on its strengths, and target the vulnerabilities of its enemies.

Revolutionary Naval Warfare

During the Iran-Iraq War, the armed forces of Iran—particularly the Revolutionary Guards (or Pasdaran)—developed a war-fighting doctrine in accord with the country’s revolutionary ideology. Based on Shiite religious concepts, the doctrine reflects Iran’s Alavi and Ashurai heritage. It draws inspiration from Ali (cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Mohammad), who chose to avoid confrontation when challenged by Arab rulers of his time, and waited for twenty-four years before assuming the caliphate, as well as from the devotion of his son Hussein, who faced a superior enemy and died in battle on the plains of Karbala on the tenth day of Muharram in the year 680 (Ashura).

Revolutionary Shiite values such as stoic endurance and devotion to the cause are granted equal, if not superior, status to the traditional military principles of mission accomplishment and the achievement of a military objective. According to this doctrine, the mere act of fighting, exerting maximum effort, and fulfilling one’s religious (and national) duty to the fullest is an end in itself. The result or outcome is of secondary importance. For adherents, martyrdom is a welcome prospect. A readiness to die, however, is not considered a substitute for lethality and effectiveness. On the contrary, the Iranian concept of Alavi/Ashurai warfare relies not just on spiritual commitment, but also on high-tech weaponry and innovative tactics—a combination employed to great effect on the ground in southern Lebanon by Iran’s protege, the Lebanese Shiite Hizballah, in its war with Israel this summer.

The most prominent expression of this doctrine was a series of naval battles with the U.S. Navy in April 1988. These took place during the final phases of the Iran-Iraq War, when hopelessly outclassed Iranian forces battled U.S. naval units in the Persian Gulf. Iran incurred heavy losses in the process. The experience taught Iran that large naval vessels are vulnerable to air and missile attacks, confirmed the efficacy of small boat operations, and spurred interest in missile-armed fast-attack craft. It also allowed Iran to expand the use of swarming tactics that form the foundation of its current approach to asymmetric naval warfare.

Naval Swarming Tactics

Swarming tactics are not new; they have been practiced by land armies for thousands of years. Such tactics require light, mobile forces with substantial striking power, capable of rapidly concentrating to attack an enemy from multiple directions and then rapidly dispersing.

Iranian naval swarming tactics focus on surprising and isolating the enemy’s forces and preventing their reinforcement or resupply, thereby shattering the enemy’s morale and will to fight. Iran has practiced both mass and dispersed swarming tactics. The former employs mass formations of hundreds of lightly armed and agile small boats that set off from different bases, then converge from different directions to attack a target or group of targets. The latter uses a small number of highly agile missile or torpedo attack craft that set off on their own, from geographically dispersed and concealed locations, and then converge to attack a single target or set of targets (such as a tanker convoy). The dispersed swarming tactic is much more difficult to detect and repel because the attacker never operates in mass formations.

During the Iran-Iraq War, the Pasdaran navy used mass swarming tactics; as a result, its forces proved vulnerable to attack by U.S. naval and air power. Because of this, it is unlikely that such tactics would be used for anything but diversionary attacks in the future. In today’s Iranian naval forces, mass swarming tactics have largely given way to dispersed swarming.

Dispersed swarming tactics are most successful when attackers can elude detection through concealment and mobility, employ stand-off firepower, and use superior situational awareness (intelligence), enabling them to find and engage the enemy first. This accounts for a number of trends in Iranian naval force development in the past two decades. The first is the acquisition and development of small, fast weapons platforms—particularly lightly armed small boats and missile-armed fast-attack craft; extended- and long-range shore- and sea-based antiship missiles; midget and diesel attack submarines (for intelligence gathering, covert mine laying, naval special warfare, and conventional combat operations); low-signature reconnaissance and combat unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs); and the adaptation of the Shahab-3 medium-range surface-to-surface missile armed with a cluster warhead reportedly carrying 1,400 bomblets, for use against enemy naval bases and carrier battle groups.

Iran has also sought to improve its ability to achieve surprise by employing low-observable technologies (such as radar-absorbent paints), strict communications discipline, stringent emissions control measures, passively or autonomously guided weapons systems (such as the Kowsar series of television-guided antiship missiles), and sophisticated command-and-control arrangements. To support its naval swarm tactics, Iran has encouraged decentralized decisionmaking and initiative, as well as autonomy and self-sufficiency among naval combat elements.

Wartime Operations

In wartime, Iranian naval forces would seek to close the Strait of Hormuz and destroy enemy forces bottled up in the Persian Gulf; therefore speed and surprise would be key. Iranian naval forces would seek to identify and attack the enemy’s centers of gravity as quickly as possible and inflict maximum losses before contact with subordinate units were lost as a result of enemy counterattacks. Geography is Iran’s ally. Because of the proximity of major shipping routes to the country’s largely mountainous 2,000-kilometer coastline, Iranian naval elements can sortie from their bases and attack enemy ships with little advance warning. Meanwhile, shore-based antiship missiles can engage targets almost anywhere in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. To achieve the latter capability, and to improve the survivability of its shore-based missile force, Iran has devoted significant efforts to extending the range of locally produced variants of a number of Chinese shore-based antiship missiles such as the HY-2 Silkworm and the C-802 (from 50 to 300 kilometers and from 120 to 170 kilometers, respectively). It has also introduced the use of helicopter-borne long-range antiship missiles.

To ensure that it can achieve surprise in the event of a crisis or war, Iran’s naval forces keep U.S. warships in the region under close visual, acoustic, and radar observation. The Iranian navy commander—Rear Adm. Sajad Kouchaki, one of the architects of the country’s naval doctrine—recently claimed that Iranian submarines continually monitor U.S. naval movements, frequently at close range, and have even passed underneath American aircraft carriers and other warships undetected. Iranian UAVs also frequently shadow U.S. carrier battle groups in the area.

Conclusion

Current Iranian naval deployments are aimed at deterring an American attack and—in the event of hostilities—entrapping and destroying U.S. naval forces in the Persian Gulf, at which time U.S. regional bases would be targeted with rocket and missile strikes as well. Iranian naval forces would conduct simultaneous close-in and stand-off attacks, relying on swarming tactics developed and refined during the Iran-Iraq War and highlighted in recent naval exercises in the Persian Gulf. The performance of Lebanese Hizballah guerrillas, who used similar tactics against much larger and more powerful Israeli ground forces in southern Lebanon last summer, provides some insight into what the U.S. Navy should expect in the event of a confrontation with Iran in the Persian Gulf.

Fariborz Haghshenass is an expert on the Iranian military.


http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2548

[dannytoro]

...It really depends what model Hornets they are carrying. Even then the load outs can vary the range widely. I'd say a 250 mile combat radius is actually about max iron bomb load of worst ranged model. You'd have to figure, an "E" model has about a 700 mile combat radius with max. iron bombs. That was the prime aim of that model series, stretch the range to the maximum. I know loaded with 12 AMRAAM and 2 Sidewinders with 2 big tanks, the Super Buff has almost 1000 mile combat radius, although it's more often used as loiter time......

[Bella]

Can we please see these missles!!!! Stop talking............I want to see!!!!

[Kiaar]

I think what a lot of people forget, regardless of where they are from, is that one missile or one torpedo does not equal one kill.

Western technology in both defense and offense is still far more advanced than Iran's. Iran is certainly doing a good job at catching up, but they still have a ways to go.

American carriers are not alone. They are surrounded by a significant amount of smaller escort ships. All of these are equipped with radar, defense systems, and all can share information. Firing only one, or even a few missiles, at a carrier group does not guarantee even one hit. There are anti missile missiles, flak, chafe, the Gatling gun system that was linked earlier in the post, radar jammers, and even physical decoys that can fool missiles into thinking they're real ships.

Now, don't get me wrong. This isn't an invincible or impenetrable system, but to assume that one missile launch is going to mean a sinking carrier is extremely naive. Not all people think this obviously, but it is a fairly common notion on this forum.

It's also important to note that aircraft will be over Iran at the same time hunting down these missiles sites. Even if they're mobile, they can't be too small or too fast if they can shoot a cruise missile several hundred miles.