Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

[jauk]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Flotilla]

At best it can operate in the Gulf of Oman, which is fine. This isn't a blue water ship anyways, and doesn't appear to be made for that purpose. I don't think they plan on using Soleimani class in deep blue waters either, theirs a real risk for catamarans of that size on dangerous stormy waters.

Agreed.

he jury is still out on what those canisters really are? If they are saying their is AD system on board,

It may have in future any kind of IR/EO laser range designator for operating those kowsar missiles. If they are really de derivative of Almas missile they would be more than good for countering small boats and shore targets, but their capability of hitting an aerial target must be secondary because of speed and range. However, I can´t understand how works Kowsar. Those white FACs seems to have a small aerial search radar, but the missile itself it is IR/EO guided, so it is difficult to understand how it is guided that missile.

was thinking these would operate together, I don't think they'd create two types of catamarans without thinking of integrating them into a fleet structure. I would think they would operate in the PG and Gulf of Oman area to add an additional offensive and defensive anti-missile umbrella around the southern waters (where most incoming missiles would likely come from anyways)

completely agreed.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Agreed.

It may have in future any kind of IR/EO laser range designator for operating those kowsar missiles. If they are really de derivative of Almas missile they would be more than good for countering small boats and shore targets, but their capability of hitting an aerial target must be secondary because of speed and range. However, I can´t understand how works Kowsar. Those white FACs seems to have a small aerial search radar, but the missile itself it is IR/EO guided, so it is difficult to understand how it is guided that missile.

completely agreed.

my guess is the radar send them toward the target and then the sensor take over after all its not that long range.
also if you look at other infrared missiles the operator in many case detect the target with the help of a radar

 

[Separ610]

Iranian, Pakistani forces hold joint naval exercise in Strait of Hormuz, Persian Gulf

Iranian and Pakistani military forces have staged a day-long joint naval training exercise in the Strait of Hormuz and the northern tip of the Persian Gulf.

www.presstv.ir

Everything seems to be okay between the two nations as the naval excercise went ahead with Pakistan.

 

[Persian Gulf]

Construction of IRGC Shahid Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[tsunset]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Is the damage proportional to a CM hit?

 

[Hack-Hook]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Is the damage proportional to a CM hit?

my guess is no its way above water line , probably some drone

 

[Immortals]

What is ironic is Iraq and Iran were able to sink tankers and commercials ships nearly 50 years ago.

Yet Houthi’s have not been able to sink a single commercial tanker despite having much more advanced CMs, drones, and anti ship BMs then either country had half century ago.

Something doesn’t add up here. I wonder if any of these missiles even have a live warhead or if the goal is to merely harass (and lightly damage), but not sink a tanker in order to avoid escalation.

 

[sahureka2]

What is ironic is Iraq and Iran were able to sink tankers and commercials ships nearly 50 years ago.

Yet Houthi’s have not been able to sink a single commercial tanker despite having much more advanced CMs, drones, and anti ship BMs then either country had half century ago.

Something doesn’t add up here. I wonder if any of these missiles even have a live warhead or if the goal is to merely harass (and lightly damage), but not sink a tanker in order to avoid escalation.

I add, and to avoid an environmental disaster that would also hit the Yemeni coasts controlled by the Houthis with serious consequences also in the local fishing sector.

 

[Mehdipersian]

What is ironic is Iraq and Iran were able to sink tankers and commercials ships nearly 50 years ago.

Yet Houthi’s have not been able to sink a single commercial tanker despite having much more advanced CMs, drones, and anti ship BMs then either country had half century ago.

Something doesn’t add up here. I wonder if any of these missiles even have a live warhead or if the goal is to merely harass (and lightly damage), but not sink a tanker in order to avoid escalation.

Tankers are moving bombs. These cannot be compared with other ships

 

[tsunset]

What is ironic is Iraq and Iran were able to sink tankers and commercials ships nearly 50 years ago.

Yet Houthi’s have not been able to sink a single commercial tanker despite having much more advanced CMs, drones, and anti ship BMs then either country had half century ago.

Something doesn’t add up here. I wonder if any of these missiles even have a live warhead or if the goal is to merely harass (and lightly damage), but not sink a tanker in order to avoid escalation.

SY (Termit) used at the time had a complete disproportionate warhead compared to other AsCM at the time and still now, all ships struck by this had been sunk or massively damaged

For comparison Noor has a 200kg, KH-35 150kg warhead

SY used by Iran and Iraq had 500kg warhead

 

[Navigator]

What is ironic is Iraq and Iran were able to sink tankers and commercials ships nearly 50 years ago.

Yet Houthi’s have not been able to sink a single commercial tanker despite having much more advanced CMs, drones, and anti ship BMs then either country had half century ago.

Something doesn’t add up here. I wonder if any of these missiles even have a live warhead or if the goal is to merely harass (and lightly damage), but not sink a tanker in order to avoid escalation.

The Houthis don't want unnecessary casualties among the crews of merchant ships, since there are usually no Americans or Israelis among these crews. Therefore, missiles with a small warhead or kamikaze drones are used for strikes.

However, it is worth noting that even during mutual attacks on merchant ships over the Iran-Iraq War, there a very little percentage of them was sank.

For example 28 attack in 1984 year an not one ship was sank

Tanker war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[tsunset]

The Houthis don't want unnecessary casualties among the crews of merchant ships, since there are usually no Americans or Israelis among these crews. Therefore, missiles with a small warhead or kamikaze drones are used for strikes.

However, it is worth noting that even during mutual attacks on merchant ships over the Iran-Iraq War, there a very little percentage of them was sank.

For example 28 attack in 1984 year an not one ship was sank
View attachment 12844

Tanker war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My personal opinion is that Iran and Iraq were using the AsCM with the one of the biggest warhead of all times (500kg compared to 100-150-200kg warheads like Harpoon, Kh-35, C-803)

 

[Immortals]

The Houthis don't want unnecessary casualties among the crews of merchant ships, since there are usually no Americans or Israelis among these crews. Therefore, missiles with a small warhead or kamikaze drones are used for strikes.

However, it is worth noting that even during mutual attacks on merchant ships over the Iran-Iraq War, there a very little percentage of them was sank.

For example 28 attack in 1984 year an not one ship was sank
View attachment 12844

Tanker war - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Look at how many of the ships suffered severe damage or set afire.

Yemen every ship it has successfully struck has been able to move back to port on its own power and the damage has been light and mostly material.

My personal opinion is that Iran and Iraq were using the AsCM with the one of the biggest warhead of all times (500kg compared to 100-150-200kg warheads like Harpoon, Kh-35, C-803)

So a 500kg warhead will completely disable/destroy a ship but a 200kg will be a mere pinprick?

Where is the logic here?

Look at this video. It is a BM hitting a commercial ship. Which I should add commercial ships don’t have armoured hulls like navy ships. The speed and KE transfer alone should severely disable the ship. But the effects were very underwhelming which leads me to believe they aren’t carrying large warheads (or any).

https://x.com/aviation_intel/status/1748496715618070960?s=46&t=Lmj7ENB6Hc7XVniwmP0DlQ

Compare that to the PG missile test

https://x.com/mhmiranusa/status/1748542032388214886?s=46&t=Lmj7ENB6Hc7XVniwmP0DlQ

You can see major differences in destructive power.

 

[Navigator]

My personal opinion is that Iran and Iraq were using the AsCM with the one of the biggest warhead of all times (500kg compared to 100-150-200kg warheads like Harpoon, Kh-35, C-803)

There different missiles were used, for example Iraq actively used Exocet from Mirage F.1