Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

[tsunset]

its not important from which country they are , they are also automated, not man operated
now a question how much cheaper ak230 is and why western one are shiny junk but Russian one fantastic?

search you tube there are several

This is classic Rheinmetall with their overpriced shiny toys such as the "anti drone swarm" cannon that they never made in production and other things such as the future looking tank that they never made, this is like South Korea and their shiny "new future thing" that will never be produced and that no one will buy

AK-230/Chinese counterparts and anything that does the same role are way much cheaper than Rheinmetall and other stock markets giants of weapon sales in wall street

AK-130 and 230 sold 1000x more than those canons and some sold nothing

 

[Hack-Hook]

This is classic Rheinmetall with their overpriced shiny toys such as the "anti drone swarm" cannon that they never made in production and other things such as the future looking tank that they never made, this is like South Korea and their shiny "new future thing" that will never be produced and that no one will buy

AK-230/Chinese counterparts and anything that does the same role are way much cheaper than Rheinmetall and other stock markets giants of weapon sales in wall street

AK-130 and 230 sold 1000x more than those canons and some sold nothing

as I said not important , here the talk is not about AK-130/230 vs Oerlikon
its about manned gun vs remote controlled e/o assisted guns. and i stand correct as those two Russian gun are also remote controlled

the oerlikon example was brought up because the discussion was originally about oerlikon guns

 

[Immortals]

as I said not important , here the talk is not about AK-130/230 vs Oerlikon
its about manned gun vs remote controlled e/o assisted guns. and i stand correct as those two Russian gun are also remote controlled

the oerlikon example was brought up because the discussion was originally about oerlikon guns

Solemani and Abu Mahdi ship are auto operated.

Navy a bit behind on design. We have yet to see her destroyer concept enter shipyard.

Also what happened to Persian Gulf Warship? They claimed they completed one section and nothing as heard of since.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Solemani and Abu Mahdi ship are auto operated.

Navy a bit behind on design. We have yet to see her destroyer concept enter shipyard.

Also what happened to Persian Gulf Warship? They claimed they completed one section and nothing as heard of since.

the Russian ship that hit just recently in black sea had 2 ak-630 but it got hit when faced a swarm of 4-5 sea drone . Shahid Soleimani have 1 remote controlled 30mm gun and 4 remote controlled 20mm gun. the ship lack a critical part and that is a radar to control guns in test video they were remotely controlled but there was not evidence that they are tied to a radar or even electro/optically corrected. so while the ship is one step in correct direction it still have things to do

https://iswnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Iranian-20-mm-Gatling-three-barreled-naval-gun.mp4

about abu-mahdi ship .


still not tied to radar or electro/optical system

 

[Hack-Hook]

Solemani and Abu Mahdi ship are auto operated.

Navy a bit behind on design. We have yet to see her destroyer concept enter shipyard.

Also what happened to Persian Gulf Warship? They claimed they completed one section and nothing as heard of since.

in 1401 they claimed they put it in water in 1403 that mean probably in 1403 you see another section built if they gave them money like they do now

 

[Harbyharb]

the Russian ship that hit just recently in black sea had 2 ak-630 but it got hit when faced a swarm of 4-5 sea drone . Shahid Soleimani have 1 remote controlled 30mm gun and 4 remote controlled 20mm gun. the ship lack a critical part and that is a radar to control guns in test video they were remotely controlled but there was not evidence that they are tied to a radar or even electro/optically corrected. so while the ship is one step in correct direction it still have things to do

I feel like this is a bad comparison because AK-630 is very outdated and are not suited to engage miniscule surface threats.

If you have seen videos of Russian vessels conducting drills against surface targets or engage vessels on counter-piracy missions, you would note a fairly straightfoward lack of accuracy, and that is not just because AK-630 is innately inaccurate (due to powder-gas driven), but also that in remote control via console. While the remote system enables EO lock via CITV apart from the A-213 fire control radar, since the fire control is usually placed seperate from the gun turret itself and individual fire control are responsible for a cluster of AK-630s, the margin of error for individual turrets can be immense, and in actual practice backup manual control is used.

Not just that, AK-630 is severely limited in munition options, 30x165mm usually only sports API and HEI projectiles, far from ideal for engaging surface threats.

From what I've read, the IRGC vessels are quite mindful about their distinct needs in engaging small surface threats, and their weapon stations usually includes built-in EO sights with modern EO tracking and targeting, powering externally powered chain guns that are usually more accurate and adjustable rate of fire, with potentially more advanced munition such as programmable air-burst.

 

[Flotilla]

the problem with our 20m cannons that i wish them to be replaced is they are manned and stabilized and i believe such gun have no place on a ship I even don't like them on fixed installation but at least on ground you can hit some target with them if you are trained on ships even Silvester Stallone with the help of a platoon of Hollywood special effect specialist and receiving direction from George Lucas cant hit anything with them

Manned light guns and cannons are necessary even today. Remember RWS are good for all weather and most of them are capable of firing low moving aerial targets.
But reasons to not have all guns aboard RWS are;

1º.- They are expensive. Even 12,7mm RWS can cost some hundreds thousands of dollars. It is not so simple to buy some servo motors and cameras and fit them into a 0,50 inch automatic gun. You must treat all pieces to make them seaworthy and long lasting, and that requires a lot of $$$$.

2º.- Logistics are challenging. They are prone to have malfunctions on their IR/EO devices and failures in their servo engines because of the salty environments.

3º.- Useless in case of combat damage. A modern warship have a CIC and sensors and specialized crew. If some combat damage is received all guns will be shotdown. Fire can cut electricity. A naval mine can take down or damage connections and plugs that would feed electric RWS. Even a light missile (MBDA brimstone have been designed for anti ship missions too) can shake and pull up the RWS from their rings.

4º.- You need specialized crew for maintenance and... operate them.

A manual gun can be manned by any member of the crew. It can be repaired fast and easily in the ship workshops. It is independent from electricity grid and can be used even after extensive combat damage.

You can see how some MK 38 Mod2 from the US Navy can be used in RWS mode and manned. That means that even US Navy doesn´t put all the egg in the same basket and trust in manual mode gun combat use.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Manned light guns and cannons are necessary even today. Remember RWS are good for all weather and most of them are capable of firing low moving aerial targets.
But reasons to not have all guns aboard RWS are;

1º.- They are expensive. Even 12,7mm RWS can cost some hundreds thousands of dollars. It is not so simple to buy some servo motors and cameras and fit them into a 0,50 inch automatic gun. You must treat all pieces to make them seaworthy and long lasting, and that requires a lot of $$$$.

2º.- Logistics are challenging. They are prone to have malfunctions on their IR/EO devices and failures in their servo engines because of the salty environments.

3º.- Useless in case of combat damage. A modern warship have a CIC and sensors and specialized crew. If some combat damage is received all guns will be shotdown. Fire can cut electricity. A naval mine can take down or damage connections and plugs that would feed electric RWS. Even a light missile (MBDA brimstone have been designed for anti ship missions too) can shake and pull up the RWS from their rings.

4º.- You need specialized crew for maintenance and... operate them.

A manual gun can be manned by any member of the crew. It can be repaired fast and easily in the ship workshops. It is independent from electricity grid and can be used even after extensive combat damage.

You can see how some MK 38 Mod2 from the US Navy can be used in RWS mode and manned. That means that even US Navy doesn´t put all the egg in the same basket and trust in manual mode gun combat use.

a manned gun only can hit a tanker sized target in case of war on a sea that is not pond calm


you want your gin in case of damage to sensor have two or three 12.5mm gun under the deck stored somewhere but you are welcome hit anything with them at low visibility situation

 

[tsunset]

and you see the same gun on Kaman class patrol boats which is as useless as the one on jamaran and alvands against fast moving target

so it seems the source of gun is not USA but European . the one we get from USA was actually ww2 era

But where is the WW2 Oerlikon used in the current IRIN/IRGCN? I only see post 60s Oerlikons, not the WW2 crank use one

 

[tsunset]

Manned light guns and cannons are necessary even today. Remember RWS are good for all weather and most of them are capable of firing low moving aerial targets.
But reasons to not have all guns aboard RWS are;

1º.- They are expensive. Even 12,7mm RWS can cost some hundreds thousands of dollars. It is not so simple to buy some servo motors and cameras and fit them into a 0,50 inch automatic gun. You must treat all pieces to make them seaworthy and long lasting, and that requires a lot of $$$$.

2º.- Logistics are challenging. They are prone to have malfunctions on their IR/EO devices and failures in their servo engines because of the salty environments.

3º.- Useless in case of combat damage. A modern warship have a CIC and sensors and specialized crew. If some combat damage is received all guns will be shotdown. Fire can cut electricity. A naval mine can take down or damage connections and plugs that would feed electric RWS. Even a light missile (MBDA brimstone have been designed for anti ship missions too) can shake and pull up the RWS from their rings.

4º.- You need specialized crew for maintenance and... operate them.

A manual gun can be manned by any member of the crew. It can be repaired fast and easily in the ship workshops. It is independent from electricity grid and can be used even after extensive combat damage.

You can see how some MK 38 Mod2 from the US Navy can be used in RWS mode and manned. That means that even US Navy doesn´t put all the egg in the same basket and trust in manual mode gun combat use.

Exactly, one hit on a critical component and all is gone, while the manual one would still be operational and easy to repair

 

[Immortals]

in 1401 they claimed they put it in water in 1403 that mean probably in 1403 you see another section built if they gave them money like they do now

How are you going to put a section in water? It will start to sink from flooding. The reported section wouldn’t make sense to put in water at this time.

And satellites would be able to pick up since you can count on one hand the amount of Iranian shipyards that can build such a ship.

It’s possible Iran is building it under a cover like the Chinese do.

 

[Hack-Hook]

But where is the WW2 Oerlikon used in the current IRIN/IRGCN? I only see post 60s Oerlikons, not the WW2 crank use one

you didn't understand the point of my discussion , the oerlikon 20mm gun we have are manned gun .
they are only suited for attacking tanker size targets here you guys said every one use oerlikon guns i pointed out they use a complete different beast.
by the way WW2 oerlikon we had were sold to pakistan right now we use Vietnam war era oerlikon we get from England when we bought Sam Frigates

 

[Hack-Hook]

Exactly, one hit on a critical component and all is gone, while the manual one would still be operational and easy to repair

no a one hit to a manned gun also render it in operable . and well if so go tell IRGC replace remote controlled guns on Shahid Duleimani and Abumahdi ships with manned ones.

 

[Hack-Hook]

How are you going to put a section in water? It will start to sink from flooding. The reported section wouldn’t make sense to put in water at this time.

And satellites would be able to pick up since you can count on one hand the amount of Iranian shipyards that can build such a ship.

It’s possible Iran is building it under a cover like the Chinese do.

the it in the sentence is a reference to the ship not the section . and honestly you still believe what they say?

 

[Immortals]

@Hack-Hook

IRGC continues to innovate vs IRIN

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