Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

Flames In The Desert said:
Looking good🚢
GMvY9EZXAAAYkHg
GMvY9CUXsAAeR01

(y)
Click to expand...
i reserve my judgement for the time it get completed and see its capabilities
 
Hack-Hook said:
nothing clear , they only said fire in engine room , it was not far from the land and it was in shallow water , wonder why they could not maroon the ship or send help

you don't get it , that ship was one of the most important logistic asset of our navy.
the ship speed was equal to the speed of our warships, the rest of our supply ships travel at half the speed of our warships.
it was a pretty high value target , if today we loose behshad in two month we can retrofit to replace it . i don't see how we can replace kharg anytime soon, well unless Russia or china agree to build us a replacement on credit or in deal for oil
Click to expand...
It has nothing of the same importance as Behsshad, i guarantee you that if Behshad is gone, you will have to wait at least 2 years for a new one if it is for IRGC, and a decade for IRIN

An utility warship armed with 2 guns versus a spy ship targeting Israeli assets or other such as Shahid Roudaki that can target Israel from the Persian Gulf, what will they aim at?

This was a piece of scrap dating from 1960 with 1960 components and propulsion, it is done and gone, deal with it and stop putting the blame of bad maintenance and lack of new parts to an "Israeli sabotage"
 
Hack-Hook said:
you don't get it , that ship was one of the most important logistic asset of our navy.
the ship speed was equal to the speed of our warships, the rest of our supply ships travel at half the speed of our warships.
it was a pretty high value target , if today we loose behshad in two month we can retrofit to replace it . i don't see how we can replace kharg anytime soon, well unless Russia or china agree to build us a replacement on credit or in deal for oil
Click to expand...

What is the problem to build the ship? Certainly it’s not the hull. Iran can build huge aframax tankers so a bigger ship shouldn’t be the problem.

I assume it’s engines? I don’t follow the naval propulsion side of things, but I believe Iran is far behind in heavy naval propulsion. I would have hoped to see a smaller nuclear decaying reactor based concept by now.

Hack-Hook said:
i reserve my judgement for the time it get completed and see its capabilities
Click to expand...

I too am curious and will wait. I was skeptical when I heard about it. But if there is any country that has analyzed how to sink a large naval ship it is Iran, so I will reserve judgement to give them benefit of the doubt. Floating bases like Beshad is one thing, but turning tankers into carriers is radical design.

Iran certainly has the defense system capability in 2024 (naval Sayyad, naval Zubin, naval majid, etc) to cover the SHOHRAD to medium range AD coverage. It has the radar tech with Eagle Eye. It has the CWIS tech. And it has long range strike potential (BM + CM). They still lack a viable deadly ASHM in the Brahmos 1/2 category.

The question is will they actually put that defense capability in this ship or cut corners on cost.

Also Iran still lacks a mass produced heavy jet powered drone in the class of Wingman. The RQ-170 platform in 1:1 or expanded size (2:1 or even 3:1) had potential has never materialized and is a 2nd thought for the IRGC. Sofreh Mahi is likely shelved.

I don’t know if Iran needed a drone carrier at this very moment when it lacks SATCOM and most of its drones are either suicide drones or western based MaLE drones using prop engines.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
tsunset said:
It has nothing of the same importance as Behsshad, i guarantee you that if Behshad is gone, you will have to wait at least 2 years for a new one if it is for IRGC, and a decade for IRIN

An utility warship armed with 2 guns versus a spy ship targeting Israeli assets or other such as Shahid Roudaki that can target Israel from the Persian Gulf, what will they aim at?

This was a piece of scrap dating from 1960 with 1960 components and propulsion, it is done and gone, deal with it and stop putting the blame of bad maintenance and lack of new parts to an "Israeli sabotage"
Click to expand...
the important is that today after loosing that ship deploying any of our ships take twice as much time.



about importance of Behshad, let give you a short but critical history lesson
Saviz
 
Hack-Hook said:
the important is that today after loosing that ship deploying any of our ships take twice as much time.



about importance of Behshad, let give you a short but critical history lesson
Saviz
Click to expand...
Then blame it on the shipyard, stop making it like the 1960 british ship was sunk by Israel or some nonsense

Completely time worn engines from 1960

It was a question of time until it would explode, it should have been scrapped a long time ago and work for an alternative
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
tsunset said:
Then blame it on the shipyard, stop making it like the 1960 british ship was sunk by Israel or some nonsense

Completely time worn engines from 1960

It was a question of time until it would explode, it should have been scrapped a long time ago and work for an alternative
Click to expand...
i didn't knew these days around the world shipyards build the engines
and wonder why blame them , nobody order them new ships in that class
 
Hack-Hook said:
i didn't knew these days around the world shipyards build the engines
and wonder why blame them , nobody order them new ships in that class
Click to expand...
Blame the near WW2 engines and poor maintenance, it was a question of time until it explodes
 
tsunset said:
Blame the near WW2 engines and poor maintenance, it was a question of time until it explodes
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, you could very well be right, but let’s present the sabotage scenario and why the whole sinking was not only preventable, but strange.

See here:

Besides firefighting, damage control is taken very seriously, which is the emergency control of situations that may cause the sinking of a ship such as the rupture of a pipe or hull, especially below the waterline; or even damage occurring if a ship is in combat, or if a ship goes aground. Firefighting and damage control and training the crew to be able to do these jobs are of utmost importance to navies, including the Iranian Navy.

I was therefore shocked when I heard that the Kharg had sunk.

The Kharg had fire pumps -- one of which would be working at all times [and] emergency pumps, many [fire] extinguishers [especially in the engine room], a CO2 flooding system, a sprinkler system, flame detectors, and smoke detectors. Also some 400 safety circuits, each of which is capable of sounding the alarm in the engine room and on the bridge in case of a malfunction.

With all these precautions it is hard to see how the fire became uncontrollable.

It has been said that the fire broke out as a result of an explosion in one of the boilers. We know that the Kharg underwent a major refit from 2014 to 2016, during which major improvements were made to its boilers. In spite of this, it is unlikely that such an explosion would lead to an uncontrollable fire or cause damage to the hull and lead to the flooding of the engine room.

A voice recording of a telephone conversation between two former personnel of the Kharg on social media, quoting their rescued friends from the ship, indicates that during a failed paralleling of two main generators of the ship several wires and circuits caught fire, leading to a power outage and the plunging of the entire ship into darkness. Apparently, the emergency generator and other small generators could not be started and the ship remained in total darkness.
It has also been claimed that the pipe connecting the day tank to one of the main generators providing electricity to the ship had burst and, as no one was in the generator room, the generator stopped functioning while at the same time the fire spread quickly while the ship was dark.

There are other claims as well. Whether the cause of the fire in the engine room was an electrical failure, damage caused by improper repair and maintenance, poor-quality materials used during the ship's refit, or negligence -- the real cause of the fire has not been officially confirmed and it is doubtful that the Islamic republic would ever do so.

In spite of several possibilities to explain the cause of the fire in the engine room and the power outage on board, it is hard to see how the ship could have sunk. The fire invariably can cause extensive damage in the engine room and various decks, but the ship can still remain afloat, even if the engine room is being flooded. Photos shows that the ship did not lean at a dangerous angle to the port or starboard side and sunk from the stern while the bow section of the ship -- mainly intact -- remained above water.

In the light of these photos, the possibility of flooding due to a large crack or hole in the hull of the engine room area cannot be ruled out. Taking into account that the bottom and sides of the Kharg had two complete layers of watertight hull surface, it is possible that the fire and flooding was due to an act of sabotage or as a result of a hostile action
The sinking of the Kharg comes after a period in which there has been a series of explosions aboard other ships in the Gulf of Oman and surrounding waters, a region of sensitive shipping routes and simmering geopolitical tensions.

In early April, an Iranian ship called the MV Saviz, a guard base anchored for years in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, off Yemen, was targeted and damaged by mines on its hull apparently by Israeli commandos.

Former Iranian Officer Says Sabotage, Hostile Action Possible In Sinking Of Navy's Largest Ship

www.rferl.org www.rferl.org

Granted the source is a anti-IR source, but the person [interviewed] allegedly was a former naval officer on the Kharg back in the day. The information he gives is fairly detailed for someone to just be guessing or trying to spread propaganda.


I think the sinking of Kharg could go either way: a sabotage act that cascaded beyond what was intended or a faulty modernization effort alongside poor crew training that led to an unnecessary sinking of an otherwise well built vessel.
 
Iranians on the high seas. Promo video:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Adventure and maintenance operations of Naval Group 86 in Chile:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top