# Iran launches advanced Jamaran destroyer



## Abi

Iran's Navy on Friday took the delivery of the first indigenously designed and developed guided missile destroyer Jamaran in the presence of the leader of the Islamic Revelation Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

The Mowdge Class vessel has a displacement of around *1,420* tonnes and is equipped with modern radars and electronic warfare capabilities.

Jamaran, a multi-mission destroyer, can carry 120-140 personnel on board and is armed with a variety of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.

It has a top speed of up to 30 knots and has a helipad.

The vessel has also been equipped with torpedoes and modern naval cannons. The destroyer's launch marks a major technological leap for Iran's naval industries.

More ships in its class are under construction.

SF/DT

Iran launches advanced <i>Jamaran</i> destroyer

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## K^se

-_-", I love how Iran is always talking about the latest technological advances that are supposedly far superior than those in West namely the U.S. 

Some Prime Examples: Iran indigenously UAV's with pin point laser guided missiles, also your supposedly 4th Generation and 5th Generation Stealth Fighters that you developed, and also you have claimed that you developed an something to Rival the S-300 missile system..

-Now you show me, a Steam Boat with a Cannon, saying it's a guided missile destroyer?? PLEASE, get the F**K OUT..

-Also your specs a 14000 Ton Displacement really?? That's a mini aircraft carrier, The U.S Navy's biggest destroyer is 9,240 Tons that's a Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abi

K^se said:


> -_-", I love how Iran is always talking about the latest technological advances that are supposedly far superior than those in West namely the U.S.



Did it say it is far superior than "those in the West, namely the U.S"? No it did not. 



> Some Prime Examples: Iran indigenously UAV's with pin point laser guided missiles, also your supposedly 4th Generation and 5th Generation Stealth Fighters that you developed, and also you have claimed that you developed an something to Rival the S-300 missile system..



1)We have been designing UAVs for over 30 years. The first UCAV in the world was Iranian. We do have UAVs that can carry PGMs.

2) We have never claimed to be building 4th or 5th gen. fighters. We are developing a stealth UAV and so far we have conducted two tests.

3) We "are" building something to rival the S-300. It is going to be either the S-300 Russia will give us or the HQ-10. We're going to change its appearance so that Russia or China can save face in the international community and we get advanced SAM systems. 




> -Also your specs a 14000 Ton Displacement really?? That's a mini aircraft carrier, The U.S Navy's biggest destroyer is 9,240 Tons that's a Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer..



Who said it is 14,000 ton displacement? The navy commander? No, it was a typo in the article, if you look at the article i posted below, it says it is 1,400 tons. The navy commander said it was a 1,400 ton displacement vessel. This is the second vessel we have made in the Mowj class series and they have a displacement of 1,400.

It won't hurt to use your brain a little bit.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## zagahaga

look at the pissed off american ...... sad very sad

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Abi

Iran Launches 1st Domestically Made Missile Destroyer

By Ali Sheikholeslami

Feb. 19 (Bloomberg) -- Iran has put into service the country&#8217;s first domestically produced guided-missile destroyer, the Jamaran.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei launched the 94-meter (308-foot), 1,400-ton vessel at a site in the Persian Gulf, state-run Press TV said today.

Iran&#8217;s success in developing the ship shows the country is technologically self-sufficient though it is under international sanctions, the state-run broadcaster said. All research, design and production of the ship took place in Iran, where the project benefited from the work of 120 universities and research institutes, according to state television.

President Barack Obama is accelerating the deployment of new defenses against possible Iranian missile attacks in the Persian Gulf, the New York Times reported Jan. 31, citing administration and military officials. Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain, where the U.S. Navy has its regional base, agreed to host the systems, the Times said.

The new Iranian destroyer&#8217;s maximum speed is 30 knots and it can carry a crew of 140, Press TV said. It has anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles, torpedoes, naval cannons and a helipad, the channel said. More ships in the Jamaran class are under construction, Press TV cited Iran&#8217;s navy as saying.

The ship was named for an area in northern Tehran where the late founder of the Islamic republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, resided.

Iran is under three sets of United Nations sanctions for refusing to scale back its nuclear program, which the U.S. and some of its allies allege is cover for the development of weapons. Iran denies the allegation, saying the program is needed to generate electricity.

Iran Launches 1st Domestically Made Missile Destroyer (Update1) - BusinessWeek

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ek_indian

Congratulations to Iran.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## syntax_error

Abi said:


> Who said it is 14,000 ton displacement? The navy commander? No, it was a media station. The navy commander said it was a 1,400 ton displacement vessel. This is the second vessel we have made in the Mowj class series and they have a displacement of 14,000.
> 
> It won't hurt to use your brain a little bit.



First Congratualtions to Iran great step towards more self development ...
Questions

does a 1400 ton vessel classify as a Destroyer????? 

the second one u have said to be 14000 tons displacement ... what will it be i mean is it going to be an amphibious assault ship of very small aircraft carrier ...coz it gonna be huge even for a Destroyer..
if u can throw some light on this ... it would be great..


----------



## Abi

syntax_error said:


> First Congratualtions to Iran great step towards more self development ...
> Questions
> 
> does a 1400 ton vessel classify as a Destroyer?????
> 
> the second one u have said to be 14000 tons displacement ... what will it be i mean is it going to be an amphibious assault ship of very small aircraft carrier ...coz it gonna be huge even for a Destroyer..
> if u can throw some light on this ... it would be great..



Probably not in most navies. I guess you can call it frigate, but Iran has a different classification system which is not based on displacement but rather based on armament. 

It is not 14,000 by the way, it is just a typo, it's meant to be 1,400-1,500 tons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## syntax_error

Abi said:


> Probably not in most navies. I guess you can call it frigate, but Iran has a different classification system which is not based on displacement but rather based on armament.
> 
> It is not 14,000 by the way, it is just a typo, it's meant to be 1,400-1,500 tons.



ok thanks for the clarification


----------



## Abi

pictures
MehrNews.com - Iran, Iranian, Nuclear, political, world, sport, Cultural, economic, SocialAndOccations news and headlines
MehrNews.com - Iran, Iranian, Nuclear, political, world, sport, Cultural, economic, SocialAndOccations news and headlines


----------



## azfar

cheers guys, keep the progress on.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jigs

Nice ship shouldn't displacement be bigger though i saw a while back Iran had a light frigate with the same displacement or is it based on armament rather then size ? Would be good to know. 

Nevermind i talked with a few people about it and figured it out. Most likely Iran classified this as a destroyer because of the role it will do and armament may have also played a factor(Frigates have guided missiles too though) still this should be classified as a corvette/light frigate along with some of their other ships. Again though nice ship keep up the good work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Frankenstein

Proud of ya!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## K^se

Abi said:


> Did it say it is far superior than "those in the West, namely the U.S"? No it did not.
> 
> 
> 
> 1)We have been designing UAVs for over 30 years. The first UCAV in the world was Iranian. We do have UAVs that can carry PGMs.
> 
> 2) We have never claimed to be building 4th or 5th gen. fighters. We are developing a stealth UAV and so far we have conducted two tests.
> 
> 3) We "are" building something to rival the S-300. It is going to be either the S-300 Russia will give us or the HQ-10. We're going to change its appearance so that Russia or China can save face in the international community and we get advanced SAM systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who said it is 14,000 ton displacement? The navy commander? No, it was a typo in the article, if you look at the article i posted below, it says it is 1,400 tons. The navy commander said it was a 1,400 ton displacement vessel. This is the second vessel we have made in the Mowj class series and they have a displacement of 1,400.
> 
> It won't hurt to use your brain a little bit.




-Back in September 2006, there was a bit of a kerfuffle in some quarters over an Iranian news agency (IRNA) announcement that quoted the commander of the Iranian army General Attollah Salehi as saying their new indigeous Saegheh/ Saeqeh [DID: &#8220;thunder&#8221; or &#8220;lightning&#8221;, reports vary] aircraft is &#8220;similar to the F-18 fighter jet, but it is more capable and has been manufactured domestically&#8230; designed, remodeled, optimized and made more capable by our engineers&#8230; no country has aided us in its production.&#8221; Reports are also repeating Iran&#8217;s claim that it is developing a 5th generation &#8220;Shafagh&#8221; stealth fighter, without appropriate laughter or ridicule.

Readers may recall past Iranian claims re: &#8220;stealth&#8221; flying boats that obviously used stealth-killing propellers, and other such nonsense. At the time, DID offered a more sober and reasoned light on this new development. Now that IRNA news reports are resurfacing, including pictures, the issues seem worth revisiting&#8230;

Iran&#8217;s New Saegheh Fighter Enters Service

-Yeah, I do use my brain, and 1400 Ton Displacement ship, isn't even remotely close to a destroyer like I said more like a steam boat..


----------



## Hyde

welcome congrats to Abi and all Iranian brothers

i am happy to hear that and wish best of luck to Iran for their future projects


----------



## Abi

K^se said:


> -Back in September 2006, there was a bit of a kerfuffle in some quarters over an Iranian news agency (IRNA) announcement that quoted the commander of the Iranian army General Attollah Salehi as saying their new indigeous Saegheh/ Saeqeh [DID: &#8220;thunder&#8221; or &#8220;lightning&#8221;, reports vary] aircraft is &#8220;similar to the F-18 fighter jet, but it is more capable and has been manufactured domestically&#8230; designed, remodeled, optimized and made more capable by our engineers&#8230; no country has aided us in its production.&#8221; Reports are also repeating Iran&#8217;s claim that it is developing a 5th generation &#8220;Shafagh&#8221; stealth fighter, without appropriate laughter or ridicule.



The commander said that this aircraft is a test bed for our fighter project. He then went on to explain how America used the F-5 as a test bed to create the F-18. He also said this is more capable than the F-5. People on forums can claim that the Saeqeh is a stealth 100th gen F-18000 but that doesn't make it true does it? The Shafaq project has always been an advanced jet trainer project. No one has claimed that it is a 5th gen stealth fighter, although it does have some RCS reducing characteristics. 



> Readers may recall past Iranian claims re: &#8220;stealth&#8221; flying boats that obviously used stealth-killing propellers, and other such nonsense. At the time, DID offered a more sober and reasoned light on this new development. Now that IRNA news reports are resurfacing, including pictures, the issues seem worth revisiting&#8230;



What do you mean "Iranian" claims? Who claimed it? IIRC it was western Media that was making such claims. In Iranian media, it was described as a hovercraft-like vessel with reduced RCS. 



> -Yeah, I do use my brain, and 1400 Ton Displacement ship, isn't even remotely close to a destroyer like I said more like a steam boat.



Maybe you should stop using your brain then because you obviously have a low IQ like the majority of your fellow countrymen. "Steam boat" is not a ship class.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

*Best of Luck Iran !*


----------



## Luftwaffe

K^se...don't pop-in if you can't positively contribute to a thread! 
I'm reporting you k^se..

Now i have a request to Mods if they can put some americans under scrutiny on this forum for their non nonsensical blathering running mouths.

Lastly good Job Iran..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## K^se

Ohh Yes, my fellow country men don't use their brains that's why we have a 14 Trillion GDP, we are the richest nation in the world, We have the best Universities too accompany anyone majors whether it's Business,Medicine,Engineering you name it we have it. We have most technological advances in Science/Medicine,Defense,Engineering, etc... Everyday the brains we supposedly don't have makes the world a little better, and that of our citizens because of our strides each day..Ohh your clearly right, any country who's citizens have really low IQ's can achieve being the most advanced country in the world..

-Thank You


----------



## Simorgh

Abi, bargard, engad ghod nabash... khoob nist.


----------



## Jigs

K^se said:


> Ohh Yes, my fellow country men don't use their brains that's why we have a 14 Trillion GDP, we are the richest nation in the world, We have the best Universities too accompany anyone majors whether it's Business,Medicine,Engineering you name it we have it. We have most technological advances in Science/Medicine,Defense,Engineering, etc... Everyday the brains we supposedly don't have makes the world a little better, and that of our citizens because of our strides each day..Ohh your clearly right, any country who's citizens have really low IQ's can achieve being the most advanced country in the world..
> 
> -Thank You



Why do you have to be so negative ? Abi posted a achievement his country made and you have to go out of your way to bring it down.

This is very disrespectful. If your not going to be positive then don't post. If you are going to criticize don't make a idiot of yourself doing it plz. Reported..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

K^se...I'm sorry K^es i have to call you an idiot officially look up the thread name/subject no body invited you to present a speech on us of a...


----------



## Abi

K^se said:


> Ohh Yes, my fellow country men don't use their brains that's why we have a 14 Trillion GDP, we are the richest nation in the world, We have the best Universities too accompany anyone majors whether it's Business,Medicine,Engineering you name it we have it. We have most technological advances in Science/Medicine,Defense,Engineering, etc... Everyday the brains we supposedly don't have makes the world a little better, and that of our citizens because of our strides each day..Ohh your clearly right, any country who's citizens have really low IQ's can achieve being the most advanced country in the world..
> 
> -Thank You



I said the majority and i am right, the average American is not bright, of course that does not mean that all American's are stupid because that would be false for all of the reasons you mentioned above. The majority of your scientists are not American, so don't forget that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

I think it might have Cruise missiles, maybe that is what they mean when they say it is a "guided missile" destroyer. Have a look at these pictures:











Credit goes to planeman


----------



## Luftwaffe

and the credit goes to Germans after II world war lol...you americans duh!!


----------



## shchinese

This again proves that Iran is a great nation.

also damn happy to see the Chinese YJ-83 missiles on these very nice ships. the blue print of YJ-83 should be provided to Iran so they can independently upgrade/modify it to suit the requirement in the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jigs

Abi said:


> I think it might have Cruise missiles, maybe that is what they mean when they say it is a "guided missile" destroyer. Have a look at these pictures:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Credit goes to planeman



It is most likely Cruise Missiles as those boxes are very long and i don't think they could be for anything else.


----------



## Abi

shchinese said:


> This again proves that Iran is a great nation.
> 
> also damn happy to see the Chinese YJ-83 missiles on these very nice ships. the blue print of YJ-83 should be provided to Iran so they can independently upgrade/modify it to suit the requirement in the region.



Thanks. I believe China has already provided us with the blueprint. We have two versions of it, the Noor 1 and the Noor 2. The Noor 1 is a direct copy built in Iran and the Noor 2 is an upgraded version:

Noor ASM

The Noor is the bigger brother to the Kowsar. It is the most common missile in the IRGCN&#8217;s arsenal and is found on land based launchers, the Thondar and Kaman class missile boats as well as most larger IRIN vessels such as the Alvand and Mowj.
It comes in sets of 4 on each of the respective ships, while two can be fired from the Mi-17 and the F-4, while 4 can be allegedly carried on the Su-24, although no pictures of the latter have been unearthed. Like, the Kowsar, it also comes in two main variants, with a third in development. It is in the same class as the more famous Excocet missile.

The Noor-1, is copy of the C-801, the precursor to the C-802. The larger 165 kg warhead as compared to the Kowsar, means that it is most useful against frigates, cruisers and destroyers such as the &#8216;Oliver Hazard Perry&#8217; and &#8216;Ticonderoga&#8217; class of ships found in the USN 5th fleet that patrols the Persian Gulf. The largest ship sunk ever successfully sunk, albeit a test, has 10,000 tons of displacement, which is 2000 pounds greater then the Ticonderoga cruiser, the most formidable of the US destroyers. In the early &#8216;90&#8217;s, Iran received 200 C-801&#8217;s along with 8 launchers, at that point Iran began to reverse engineer them under the name &#8220;Tondar&#8221;, eventually it morphed into the Noor-1 project. In the late &#8216;90&#8217;s, Iran adapted them to fire from an F-4. The guidance and flight profile is presumably the same as the C-802. After cruising speed of mach .9 is achieved through a boost motor, it flies at 20-30 meters cruising altitude. Inertial guidance, as with the Kowsar, guides the missile to the target. When entering terminal phase, the two seeker systems activate, the first is the monopulse active radar much like the radar in the Kowsar, the second is an IR seeker that was originally squeezed into the large housing of the original missile as an after market addition, however its usefulness soon led it to become standard equipment. A sharp drop then happens, from 20-30 metres to 5-7 meters above the sea level, maintained by the radio or laser altimeter. This has the advantage of making it near invisible to the target ship because it is below the detection range, especially combined with the integrated jamming capabilities and low radar signature. The missile is driven with kinetic energy through the hull where a delayed fuze allowing the missile to explode within the target vessel. (5)(6)

Noor 1
&#8226; Range: 40 km
&#8226; Length: 6.5 m
&#8226; Missile Weight: 715+ kg
&#8226; Warhead: 165 kg
&#8226; Speed: .9 mach
&#8226; Guidance: Inertial in cruise with monopulse active radar and IR Seeker in terminal

The Noor-2 replaced the original solid fuel rocket of the Noor-1 with a much more powerful turbojet. However the actual range gained is somewhat contentious, some use set figure of 120 km found on the C-802(on which the Noor-2 is a loose copy of). However some cite the domestic modifications to the Microturbo TRI 60-2 powerplant as evidence that the range was extended, and in 2006, during the &#8216;Blow of Zolfaqar&#8217; wargames, commanders were quoted as saying it was 200 km. However the latter number is cast into doubt when the rest of the article mentions that the missile was only ever fired from warships, whereas in 1997, the Noor-1 was tested from an F-4. (7) The most likely range is somewhere around 170 km as it fits in line with the upgrades and domestic production of the turbojet, under the name of Tolloue 4 and 5.(8) Although the missile is overall lighter then the Noor-1 due to reduction in the solid fuel, the warhead remains the same packing the same punch, as do the targeting mechanisms remain unchanged. There are several key changes however. First, in the terminal phase, an upgraded altimeter allows the missile to hug the water closer, staying 3-5 meters above the surface. Second, the option of having a &#8216;pop-up&#8217; attack pattern was also introduced by Chinese partners in 2006. A &#8216;pop-up&#8217; pattern involves an immediate jump by the missile in the last few seconds allowing the missile to dive deep into the deck of the target. Third is the introduction of manoeuvring algorithms to make it harder for active ship defences to stop the missile. (9)

Noor 2
&#8226; Range: 170 km (140-200 km possible)
&#8226; Length: 6.5 m
&#8226; Missile Weight: 715+ kg
&#8226; Warhead: 165 kg
&#8226; Speed: .9 mach
&#8226; Guidance
o Cruise: Inertial
o Terminal: DM-3BMonopulse active radar and IR Seeker
&#8226; Alterations
o Turbojet engine
o Lower altitude in terminal phase
o Introduction of manoeuvring and &#8216;pop-up&#8217; attack options 

The Arkenstone: Naval Weapons - Anti-Ship Missiles - The Kowsar, Noor and Raad


----------



## Abi

Jigs said:


> It is most likely Cruise Missiles as those boxes are very long and i don't think they could be for anything else.



We will have to wait and see. I believe they inaugurated this ship prematurely for political reasons. I don't think it is finished yet, it is supposed to have the Chinese FM-80 SAM, which is based on the French Crotale system.


----------



## shchinese

nice work. it is a shame that the original Chinese missile provided to Iran has a shitty range of 40km. but damn nice to see Iran is capable of upgrading the missile on its own.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

shchinese said:


> nice work. it is a shame that the original Chinese missile provided to Iran has a shitty range of 40km. but damn nice to see Iran is capable of upgrading the missile on its own.



Thanks again. The link i provided on the last post talks in detail about all of our anti-ship missiles. Here is a picture of them. The credit for this goes to `planeman`.


----------



## Abi

The FM-80 SAM system is supposed to go where the four holes are in the picture below:


----------



## Jigs

Planeman's Military Analysis: Bluffer's Guide to Iranian Naval Power

Here is the guide Planeman made showing a in depth looked into Iran Naval units.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi




----------



## Abi




----------



## TechLahore

K^se said:


> Ohh Yes, my fellow country men don't use their brains that's why we have a 14 Trillion GDP, we are the richest
> 
> -Thank You



So when China overtakes your GDP you will concede that your IQ has diminished and that the Chinese are smarter than you?

Please study the history of WW II more closely. You might discover the real reasons why America is the richest and most powerful country in the world today. It has very little to do with high IQ and a lot to do with conditions created by others that America was geographically positioned to exploit. And by the way, historically, the 70-odd year American run is the blink of an eye. The Persian Empire ruled much of the known world over thousands of years. So what if Iran's fortunes took a downward turn for a mere decades, and America's took a turn for the better? 70 years does not history make.

I am a big fan of American ingenuity. But when you dispel the best traits of your people and instead embrace arrogance and hubris, you cut a very, very sorry figure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

70 Year down the lane and bankruptcy on the rise now american govt is smarter they wanted war they got several but in return they got what we all witnessed!.

american people or Chinese or Iranian or others there are smart people and lazy ones too never the less there are many who are realizing their mistakes and becoming smart! 
"never underestimate your opponent"


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> When entering terminal phase, the two seeker systems activate, the first is the monopulse active radar...


This is how a monopulse radar works...






Basically...A single signal is split into four and the target is supposed to be inside that shaded area. Less sophisticated ECM will not defeat a monopulse radar but who said the US is one of those 'less sophisticated'?

Article: Deceptive jamming against monopulse radars. - Journal of Electronic Defense | HighBeam Research - FREE trial


> This three-part consideration of the deceptive jamming of monopulse radars ends with a discussion of the *"cross eye" jamming technique*. Several other deceptive techniques remain untreated, but those we have covered are representative. It is important to remember that chaff, decoys and denial jamming are also effective against monopulse radars.



RADAR WARNING RECEIVERS AND DEFENSIVE ELECTRONIC COUNTERMEASURES


> Monopulse radars are notoriously difficult to jam and require more cunning techniques such as *cross eye jamming*. A cross eye jammer employs two deception repeaters which retransmit the impinging radar signal with set time delays. By situating the transmitting antennas at the extremities of the aircraft (eg out on the wings) and manipulating the time delays, the cross-eye jammer distorts the shape (and hence perceived direction) of the returned echo (wavefront). A monopulse track ing system aligns itself with the direction of the incoming return from the target and is thus driven off the target.


There are many other techniques to nullify a monopulse radar. The more sophisticated the electronics and avionics, the more robust and effective the ECM signals. For a monopulse radar, the target *MUST* remain inside that shaded area and if one of the four receivers is deceived in any way, the monopulse system will believe itself to be out of calibration. The entire system then repeatedly reset itself, rendering the missile useless.



Abi said:


> A sharp drop then happens, from 20-30 metres to 5-7 meters above the sea level, maintained by the radio or laser altimeter. This has the advantage of making it near invisible to the target ship because it is below the detection range, especially combined with the integrated jamming capabilities and low radar signature.


AWACS will detect the missile long before it reaches the fleet, probably detect the launch itself.



Abi said:


> Third is the introduction of manoeuvring algorithms to make it harder for active ship defences to stop the missile. (9)


Which also limit its maximum range. Maneuvers *ALWAYS* cost time and fuel.

So as long as the fleet's AWACS detect the missile, in less than five seconds, fleet defense, or even single ship defense for that matter, can launch chaff/flare defenses that will totally blanket the missile's sensors, even before the missile achieve what is called 'horizon break', that is the precise moment when a missile is supposed to catch the first glimpse of the a target. What happens is as the missile is happily cruising along and in an instant, it sees nothing but noise...That moment of detection of that noise is 'horizon break' when it sees something other than ocean surface. Same as if in that same instant it sees the target, which to its computerized mind, the target would look something like this...






All the surfaces and edges on a ship is recreated, hence those squares.

Rafael Anti-Ship Missile Defense System - Decoys


> These lightweight chaff rockets are equipped with a programmable electronic timer to generate realistic targets, a *few thousand of square meters in size*, at ranges between 500 and 2000 meters from the ship.


A few chaff canisters can create an electronic blanket ten or more times the broadside area of a Nimitz class aircraft carrier, totally blinding the missile. Same for flare against IR sensors. So as long as the fleet is covered by AWACS, it will have ample time to deploy these defenses.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> blah blah blah.



These missiles have already been tested on western defenses by Hezbollah against Israel and they were successful.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> These missiles have already been tested on western defenses by Hezbollah against Israel and they were successful.


Suuuure they have.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> Suuuure they have.



Yes they have. INS Hanit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

GREAT PERSIAN NATION ... 

What can you add , amazing achivement by Iranian people and desire to be free from some other nation that just like to trool around the world bullying ppl

By the way out of curiosity is it possible for Iran to put a S300 battery on a destroyer ??? Would it still work against Aircrafts ? lets say something like F15 etc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

Whilst we're on the topic of Iranian Anti-Ship assets, Iran's light attack helicopter, the Shahed 285 can carry two Kowsar missiles. These are the same missiles which knocked out a 1,000+ Ton Israeli corvette armed with the latest defense systems the west has to offer.


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> Yes they have. INS Hanit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Right...So a corvette represent all of 'Western defense' mechanisms?



You must have a difficult time comprehending what I explained. Sorry...But I cannot make it any simpler without violating the laws of physics.


----------



## Abi

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> GREAT PERSIAN NATION ...
> 
> What can you add , amazing achivement by Iranian people and desire to be free from some other nation that just like to trool around the world bullying ppl
> 
> By the way out of curiosity is it possible for Iran to put a S300 battery on a destroyer ??? Would it still work against Aircrafts ? lets say something like F15 etc




Technically it would be possible, but in reality it won't happen.

Firstly, this ship is a light Frigate and not a Destroyer and Iran has no intentions of building large warships in the near future as they have no place in it's "everywhere and no where" naval doctrine. Which is why we are investing a lot of money on Fast attack Craft and Submarines.

All of the naval threats against Iran are confined to the Persian Gulf area and Iran's land launched Anti-ship missiles cover the entire Persian Gulf. 

Another reason is that the S300 could be based on Land and it would still cover most of the Persian Gulf. 

You can fit the S300 on large destroyers like China does on it's 7,100 ton type 051c destroyer, but not on a 1,420 ton Frigate.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> Right...So a corvette represent all of 'Western defense' mechanisms?
> 
> 
> 
> You must have a difficult time comprehending what I explained. Sorry...But I cannot make it any simpler without violating the laws of physics.



No, a corvette doesn't "represent all of Western defense" mechanisms because a corvette is a ship! 

On it however, are the defense mechanisms you talked about and they failed to intercept Iran's smallest anti-ship missile.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> No, a corvette doesn't "represent all of Western defense" mechanisms because a corvette is a ship!


Very good.



Abi said:


> On it however, are the defense mechanisms you talked about and they failed to intercept Iran's smallest anti-ship missile.


Then how can you say that this piece of Iranian junk 'defeated' anything? It gone up against only one ship so far. Looky here...I know you are desperately gullible to grasp at any straw...But do try to exercise some critical thinking.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> Very good.
> 
> 
> Then how can you say that this piece of Iranian junk 'defeated' anything? It gone up against only one ship so far. Looky here...I know you are desperately gullible to grasp at any straw...But do try to exercise some critical thinking.



Western defenses must be a POS then if they failed to intercept this "Iranian Junk".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> Western defenses must be a POS then if they failed to intercept this "Iranian Junk".


Yer right...And Iraq 'won' Desert Storm.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> Yer right...And Iraq 'won' Desert Storm.



No they didn't. But Western anti-ship missile defenses failed to intercept Iran's lightest anti-ship missile, that is a fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> No they didn't. But Western anti-ship missile defenses failed to intercept Iran's lightest anti-ship missile, that is a fact.


You must be a very very simple minded teenager. You failed to see the difference between human incompetence and system limitations.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> You must be a very very simple minded teenager. You failed to see the difference between human incompetence and system limitations.



And you must be very naive. The doctrine of the IDF navy requires for defense systems to be switched on at all times. They are switched on during peacetime, you think they would be switched off during a combat operation in the middle of a war?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> And you must be very naive. The doctrine of the IDF navy requires for defense systems to be switched on at all times. They are switched on during peacetime, you think they would be switched off during a combat operation in the middle of a war?


Very good...Not...So if you concede that human incompetence is either the cause or a major factor in this event, then how can you say that this piece of Iranian junk 'defeated' anything? In weapons development and testing, based from my experience, a weapon should be tested against the full measure of defense wielded by a potential adversary operated by fully trained personnel. That mean get some of my guys to play the bad guys. Have them fully caffeinated running on the best ship or fighter aircraft or tanks or artillery. Let them know ahead of time that an 'attack' is coming so they can fully powered up their defenses to put up the best resistance for this new weapon. That is only way to know the quality and capability of your build. Another important factor/question is the technological level of your potential adversary. It is always easier to simulate an inferior adversary than a superior one. So has Iran tested the Kowsar or <whatever> against an aircraft carrier force centered by a ship as capable as the USS Enterprise? In a real war, you hope to surprise the enemy when his defenses are either off or at ease but you should always be prepared to meet him at his best.


----------



## su-47

Gambit, I would think twice before calling something 'junk'. The fact remains that the missile did get through INS Hanit's defences. Israel claims the defence systems were not deployed, but many believe that the defence systems failed. And we all know that it takes more than 'junk' to get through Israeli defence systems, many of which rival America's own. 

As for Abi, I am not sure how effective Kowsar is. It might be small enough to sneak through enemy defenses, but it seems to lack punch. It couldn't even sink a corvette after hitting it! Will it be useful against larger ships like the Ticonderoga or Nimitz?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

su-47 said:


> Gambit, I would think twice before calling something 'junk'. The fact remains that the missile did get through INS Hanit's defences. Israel claims the defence systems were not deployed, but many believe that the defence systems failed. And we all know that it takes more than 'junk' to get through Israeli defence systems, many of which rival America's own.
> 
> As for Abi, I am not sure how effective Kowsar is. It might be small enough to sneak through enemy defenses, but it seems to lack punch. It couldn't even sink a corvette after hitting it! Will it be useful against larger ships like the Ticonderoga or Nimitz?



The Kowsar is not designed for Corvettes, it is designed for ships with a displacement of less than 200 Tons. Hezbollah didn't have any larger Anti-ship Missiles in 2006 although i am sure they do this time round.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> Very good...Not...So if you concede that human incompetence is either the cause or a major factor in this event, then how can you say that this piece of Iranian junk 'defeated' anything? In weapons development and testing, based from my experience, a weapon should be tested against the full measure of defense wielded by a potential adversary operated by fully trained personnel. That mean get some of my guys to play the bad guys. Have them fully caffeinated running on the best ship or fighter aircraft or tanks or artillery. Let them know ahead of time that an 'attack' is coming so they can fully powered up their defenses to put up the best resistance for this new weapon. That is only way to know the quality and capability of your build. Another important factor/question is the technological level of your potential adversary. It is always easier to simulate an inferior adversary than a superior one. So has Iran tested the Kowsar or <whatever> against an aircraft carrier force centered by a ship as capable as the USS Enterprise? In a real war, you hope to surprise the enemy when his defenses are either off or at ease but you should always be prepared to meet him at his best.



How is it human incompetence? The defense systems were switched on and they failed.

Iran has tested the missles against ships and continues to do so at every major war games they conduct. The Kowsar is a tiny Anti-ship Missile, it is designed for Fast attack crafts with a displacement of 200 Tons max. For your aircraft carriers, we have the Ra'ad AShM.


----------



## gambit

su-47 said:


> Gambit, I would think twice before calling something 'junk'.


I know, man...Just having some fun. 



su-47 said:


> The fact remains that the missile did get through INS Hanit's defences. Israel claims the defence systems were not deployed, but many believe that *the defence systems failed*. And we all know that it takes more than 'junk' to get through Israeli defence systems, many of which rival America's own.


The problem here is the lack of clarity on the accusation of 'failure'. Take a cruise missile for example. Whenever an aircraft fly below a defense's radar horizon, odds are very good, better than average, that the missile will succeed. In this context, the defensive measures did not really fail because radar detection is only the first part of the entire system. However, if the ship managed to detect the incoming missile, deployed distraction/seduction tactics, took drastic evasive maneuvers...And still got hit by the missile...Now we, the defense, have a serious problem. In other words, we have no possible excuse as everything we can deployed and employed -- we did.


----------



## Abi

gambit said:


> I know, man...Just having some fun.
> 
> 
> The problem here is the lack of clarity on the accusation of 'failure'. Take a cruise missile for example. Whenever an aircraft fly below a defense's radar horizon, odds are very good, better than average, that the missile will succeed. In this context, the defensive measures did not really fail because radar detection is only the first part of the entire system. However, if the ship managed to detect the incoming missile, deployed distraction/seduction tactics, took drastic evasive maneuvers...And still got hit by the missile...Now we, the defense, have a serious problem. In other words, we have no possible excuse as everything we can deployed and employed -- we did.



You don't seem to be able to comprehend a very simple concept so i will "Americanize" it for you:

1.The anti-ship missile was launched with the aim of hitting the ship. 
2.The ships defenses had the aim of stopping the anti-ship missile from hitting said ship.
3.The Missile reached it's goal and hit the ship. 
4.The ships defenses failed their goal and didn't stop the missile from hitting the ship. 

That seems like a failure to me. If you disagree, take it up with the dead IDF sailors and the disabled ship.


----------



## qsaark

Abi said:


> You don't seem to be able to comprehend a very simple concept so i will "Americanize" it for you:
> 
> 1.The anti-ship missile was launched with the aim of hitting the ship.
> 2.The ships defenses had the aim of stopping the anti-ship missile from hitting said ship.
> 3.The Missile reached it's goal and hit the ship.
> 4.The ships defenses failed their goal and didn't stop the missile from hitting the ship.
> 
> That seems like a failure to me. If you disagree, take it up with the dead IDF sailors and the disabled ship.


You are wasting your breath and your time. Pick your debate with a sensible person who is not carrying an immense burden of proving his loyalty at any cost. You&#8217;ll come across certain people who are by default more interested in bullying and intimidating in order to overcome the resistance (of opinion) rather than refuting an argument with a counter-argument. This is but the sad reality of their deficient and insecure personality and no matter how much they try, they just can&#8217;t overcome this vacuum. A wise person must avoid such people to save his precious time. By the way, heartiest congratulation on all your progress no matter how insignificant it may look. Even the greatest achievements of the mankind had very humble beginnings.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Righteous_Fire

qsaark said:


> You are wasting your breath and your time. Pick your debate with a sensible person who is not carrying an immense burden of proving his loyalty. By the way, heartiest congratulation on all your progress no matter how insignificant it may look. Even the greatest achievements of the mankind had very humble beginnings.



Indeed! Congrats are in order to Iran and all our Iranian brothers.

considering the amount of sanctions and embargoes they have to suffer (irrespective of the reasons), this is more of a miracle!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

Thank you guys.


----------



## qsaark

Abi said:


> Thank you guys.


You are most welcome brother. Please note that obnoxious language for example "*this piece of Iranian junk&#8230;. very very simple minded teenager&#8230;.* etc." is very much 'reportable'. Mods do their best to keep the forum 'clean' of this type of language, but sometimes they miss certain things. Feel free to use the 'report' button and register your concern over the use of such language.


----------



## Abi

qsaark said:


> You are most welcome brother. Please not that obnoxious language for example "*this piece of Iranian junk. very very simple minded teenager.* etc." is very much 'reportable'. Mods do their best to keep the forum 'clean' of this type of language, but sometimes they miss certain things. Feel free to use the 'report' button and register your concern over the use of such language.



I will do, thanks for the tip


----------



## gambit

Abi said:


> That seems like a failure to me. If you disagree, take it up with the dead IDF sailors and the disabled ship.


Absolutely...I 'agree' %100...Iranian weapons are the best. No objections.


----------



## gambit

qsaark said:


> You are wasting your breath and your time. Pick your debate with a sensible person who is not carrying an immense burden of proving his loyalty at any cost. Youll come across certain people who are by default more interested in bullying and intimidating in order to overcome the resistance (of opinion) rather than refuting an argument with a counter-argument. This is but the sad reality of their deficient and insecure personality and no matter how much they try, they just cant overcome this vacuum. A wise person must avoid such people to save his precious time. By the way, heartiest congratulation on all your progress no matter how insignificant it may look. Even the greatest achievements of the mankind had very humble beginnings.


Are you still following me around? Ya know sumthin...I suspect that your outward hostility is a cover for a secret 'mancrush' you have for me. I am already spoken by a woman but am flattered  nevertheless. You really do need to speak to a mental health professional about this internal conflict you are experiencing. Good luck.


----------



## qsaark

> Ya know sumthin...I suspect that your outward hostility is a cover for a secret 'mancrush' you have for me. I am already spoken by a woman but am flattered nevertheless


Looks like you missed your regular visit to the VA Hospital. You have beautifully proven my point "deficient and insecure personality " by expressing your unfulfilled 'needs'.
Reported.



gambit said:


> You really do need to speak to a mental health professional about this internal conflict you are experiencing. Good luck.


You forgot to use the words 'poseur', 'looser' and what not you love to use. Come one Gambit, your post looks rather incomplete without these 'pearls'.


----------



## Righteous_Fire

gambit said:


> Absolutely...I 'agree' %100...Iranian weapons are the best. No objections.



Man! "gambit" no body's saying that!

Many of the things youv'e said are right, so you dont have to be all accepty accepty now 



gambit said:


> Are you still following me around? Ya know sumthin...I suspect that your outward hostility is a cover for a secret 'mancrush' you have for me. I am already spoken by a woman but am flattered nevertheless. You really do need to speak to a mental health professional about this internal conflict you are experiencing. Good luck.



Gambit!  it doesnt have to be this way Bro! thats not a nice thing to say  you two are both seniors here and both demand respect from us as well as for each other 

PS: (otherwise I might have to say: get a room you two!!? ) 

^ that was a joke so no hard feelings either of you two


----------



## qsaark

Righteous_Fire said:


> Gambit!  it doesnt have to be this way Bro! thats not a nice thing to say  you two are both seniors here and both demand respect from us as well as for each other


Well he is in a sorry habit of using foul language. This is not for the first time and I bet not for the last. And 'respect', well this word for him has lost its meaning in the Jungles of ..... let it go.


----------



## Abi

I found out that the surface to air missile it has is the Standard missile:

Standard SAM
Iran has reverse engineered the SM-1 Standard naval SAM missile and employs variants as both surface-to-surface and surface-to-air systems, possibly with the local name &#8220;Fajr&#8221;. The success and extent of service of the system is open to question, and it is thought that the Iranian Navy, who had fitted a Kaman class missile boat with the system after the retirement of the sole Babr class destroyer (Allen M Summer class FRAMII) which had carried 4 twin boxed launchers, and also trialed an air-launched anti-ship version, has retired the system. The reverse-engineered missile is claimed to have several enhancements including digital components allowing it employ different radar frequencies. In the SAM role the Fajar is fired from twin as per the SM-1 system on Babr, which are now mounted on an adapted I-Hawk SAM launcher. Performance is not known but is likely to be similar to the SM-1MR (RIM-66A Block-IV) naval missile, having a range of about 32km; significantly shorter than the I-Hawk.



Fortress Iran

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## ASQ-1918

Good achievement but its not anything advanced...


----------



## Abi

ASQ-1918 said:


> Good achievement but its not anything advanced...



The next one is being built in the Caspian sea.


----------



## fhassan

gambit said:


> 'mancrush'



"Mancrush" on a drama-queen?

Thats hilarious.


----------



## samika

A bit late but congratulations. God Bless Iran

Thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

Wow hats off for the Iranian efforts to modranise their millitery despite , all the odds . 
The US has certinly puched them more towards becoming a millitery might of middle east ..they should be thnakfull to US for being their adversary too ..!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Macbeth

Abi said:


> Iran's Navy on Friday took the delivery of the first indigenously designed and developed guided missile destroyer Jamaran in the presence of the leader of the Islamic Revelation Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.
> 
> The Mowdge Class vessel has a displacement of around 14,000 tonnes and is equipped with modern radars and electronic warfare capabilities.
> 
> Jamaran, a multi-mission destroyer, can carry 120-140 personnel on board and is armed with a variety of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.
> 
> It has a top speed of up to 30 knots and has a helipad.
> 
> The vessel has also been equipped with torpedoes and modern naval cannons. The destroyer's launch marks a major technological leap for Iran's naval industries.
> 
> More ships in its class are under construction.
> 
> SF/DT
> 
> Iran launches advanced <i>Jamaran</i> destroyer



sorry but its not advanced


----------



## Abi

ariel_sharon123 said:


> sorry but its not advanced



Care to elaborate?


----------



## su-47

ariel_sharon123 said:


> sorry but its not advanced



That's being presumptuous. The systems used on the ship are not revealed, and I wouldn't discount Iranian scientists. They have done remarkably well, what with all the sanctions they are under. The true capability of these ships will be a well guarded secret. 

Congratulations to Iran for developing its indegenous defence industry so well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

Here are the pictures of its' first mission in the Persian Gulf:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abi



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cityboy

abi ...can u tell , what is the current strength of iran navy?


----------



## oceanx

gambit said:


> Are you still following me around? Ya know sumthin...I suspect that your outward hostility is a cover for a secret 'mancrush' you have for me. I am already spoken by a woman but am flattered  nevertheless. You really do need to speak to a mental health professional about this internal conflict you are experiencing. Good luck.



This is speech _unbecoming_ a self-respecting "military professional" in my layman's opinion.

Mr. Gambit, there is no need for you to rain incessantly on Iran's parade, however you feel the parade is "exaggerated" or not. They are under boycot and sanction - yet they managed the best they can. It doesn't help your cause to be seen as a bully, a sour graper - and that's unfortunately exactly how you have come across in this thread.

Why, did Iran shoot down one of your Airbuses in 1988?


----------



## oceanx

Abi said:


> ...
> 3) We "are" building something to rival the S-300. It is going to be either the S-300 Russia will give us or the HQ-10. We're going to change its appearance so that Russia or China can save face in the international community and we get advanced SAM systems.
> ...



Now how are people going to "save face" with you "spelling things out" for them? 

Are you going to change your name to "Dr. Khan" now? Don't forget he first and foremost _earned_ his right to _talk_.

All of us will be better off if we did more and said less - if for no other reason but the fact that those with fingers on the buttons for war pay attention to what you have, and not what you say you have.

With that in mind, adeos and best wishes.


----------



## fatman17

Abi said:


> Iran's Navy on Friday took the delivery of the first indigenously designed and developed guided missile destroyer Jamaran in the presence of the leader of the Islamic Revelation Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.
> 
> The Mowdge Class vessel has a *displacement of around 14,000 tonnes *and is equipped with modern radars and electronic warfare capabilities.
> 
> Jamaran, a multi-mission destroyer, can carry 120-140 personnel on board and is armed with a variety of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.
> 
> It has a top speed of up to 30 knots and has a helipad.
> 
> The vessel has also been equipped with torpedoes and modern naval cannons. The destroyer's launch marks a major technological leap for Iran's naval industries.
> 
> More ships in its class are under construction.
> 
> SF/DT
> 
> Iran launches advanced <i>Jamaran</i> destroyer



its at best a coastal patrol boat - 1,400 tons


----------



## su-47

Abi, Jamaran can't be a destroyer. Its way too small. Its too small to be even a frigate. And due to its limited size, its firepower will also be limited. Even in terms of firepower, i think this ship is only comaprable to a heavy corvette or very light frigate.


----------



## Awesome

S-2 said:


> "*Iran's Navy on Friday took the delivery of the first indigenously designed and developed guided missile destroyer Jamaran in the presence of the leader of the Islamic Revelation Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.
> 
> The Mowdge Class vessel has a displacement of around 14,000 tonnes and is equipped with modern radars and electronic warfare capabilities.
> 
> Jamaran, a multi-mission destroyer, can carry 120-140 personnel on board and is armed with a variety of anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.
> 
> It has a top speed of up to 30 knots and has a helipad.
> 
> The vessel has also been equipped with torpedoes and modern naval cannons. The destroyer's launch marks a major technological leap for Iran's naval industries.
> 
> More ships in its class are under construction.
> 
> SF/DT
> 
> Iran launches advanced <i>Jamaran</i> destroyer*"
> 
> The article's text is word for word as you cut and pasted...except the article clearly states 1420 tonnes. Writing 14,000 took an intentional effort on your part to replace one with the other and constitutes willful distortion.
> 
> Destroyer, frigate, or corvette matters less to me than your efforts to intentionally obfuscate the facts as reported.
> 
> Why did you lie to us when via the link one can read the truth in the space of seconds? I can only presume that you believe most or all here don't read the actual links and those which might would assist your duplicity.
> 
> Very, very strange but makes clear anything you write isn't trustworthy. Were it left to me, I'd ban you for such nonsense as I can see no way 1420 became 14,000 without you intending such.
> 
> That post needs reporting and I shall do so.
> 
> Thanks.


Abi, please explain. How did the text you pasted ended up with the figure of 14,000 tonnes while your link states its 1420 tonnes.


----------



## oceanx

I say give Abi a break on this. Even this so-called "Naval Intelligence Blog" quotes a displacement of 14,000.

Even the Aljazeera (not known to be full-time "liers") says "14,000".

Anyways, a "14,000-tonne displacement" was all over the web. My guess is probably the original changed its typo a day or two later (which should be obvious even to lay persons), but copied texts did not follow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S-2

I saw no correction in the original or retraction to indicate it had ever been reported as anything but 1420 tonnes by PRESS TV.


----------



## Macbeth

Abi said:


> Care to elaborate?



such a small ship cant act as destroyer.........not even as a frigate................keep it away from ISREALI or they may destroy it


----------



## Abi

oceanx said:


> Why, did Iran shoot down one of your Airbuses in 1988?




Are you kidding me? America shot down one of Iran's planes killing 290 civillians.

Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Abi

ariel_sharon123 said:


> such a small ship cant act as destroyer.........not even as a frigate................keep it away from ISREALI or they may destroy it




It isn't meant to act as a destroyer. Using your logic, the latest FACs in the world are useless because they're not as capable as destroyers?


----------



## Abi

Asim Aquil said:


> Abi, please explain. How did the text you pasted ended up with the figure of 14,000 tonnes while your link states its 1420 tonnes.



I already explained on the first page that it was a typo by pressTV and i said myself that it is 1400 tons. They must have corrected their typo.


----------



## Awesome

Abi said:


> I already explained on the first page that it was a typo by pressTV and i said myself that it is 1400 tons. They must have corrected their typo.


You should then correct it in your original post as well.

Take care about such specific details, next time.


----------



## Abi

su-47 said:


> Abi, Jamaran can't be a destroyer. Its way too small. Its too small to be even a frigate. And due to its limited size, its firepower will also be limited. Even in terms of firepower, i think this ship is only comaprable to a heavy corvette or very light frigate.



It is a frigate. Journalists don't know anything about the military. Just yesterday, the BBC showed a video of an APC and called it a Tank. The journalists just used a dictionary and literally translated as a Destroyer in English. This is a frigate and the Iranian Navy has said this already in Persian.

By the way, there is nothing wrong with its' firepower, it has a SAM system with a range of at least 32km, . It also has anti-ship missiles with a range of 200km. That is more firepower than the F-22p.


----------



## Abi

Asim Aquil said:


> You should then correct it in your original post as well.
> 
> Take care about such specific details, next time.



I was very specific. I clearly said that it was a typo. I didn't notice that they edited their post untill now.


----------



## Abi

oceanx said:


> Now how are people going to "save face" with you "spelling things out" for them?
> 
> Are you going to change your name to "Dr. Khan" now? Don't forget he first and foremost _earned_ his right to _talk_.
> 
> All of us will be better off if we did more and said less - if for no other reason but the fact that those with fingers on the buttons for war pay attention to what you have, and not what you say you have.
> 
> With that in mind, adeos and best wishes.



They said it to give an indication that we posses AD systems that they don't know about. Just to put off their military planners. I am sure that we will soon see an Iranian version of the S300 and it will either be the S300 or the HQ-10. Russia and China (especially China) want Iran to have the system, but would also don't want the political backlash, so it only makes sense. |Claiming that we can build our only only reinforces this possibility.


----------



## oceanx

Abi said:


> Are you kidding me? America shot down one of Iran's planes killing 290 civillians.
> 
> Iran Air Flight 655 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Cool your jets Abi. Of course I know and was alluding to exactly this in my reply to Gambit above.

Regards.


----------



## Abi

oceanx said:


> Cool your jets Abi. Of course I know and was alluding to exactly this in my reply to Gambit above.
> 
> Regards.



Sarcasm is hard to detect online.


----------



## Abi

Some more pictures:


----------



## Abi




----------



## Abi




----------



## Adios Amigo

very nice, lovely pictures.
















Adios


----------



## TOPGUN

Thx for the pic's ... but in all due respect wat maks this ship so advanced?


----------



## Abi

It has a SAM with a range of at least 32km and and Anti-ship missiles with the range of 200km. That makes it more capable than the F-22P which has a SAM with a 6km range , and i would consider it advanced.

There are also plans to add the FM-90 (which Iran produces domestically) to it as well.


----------



## Abi

I have compared it. It's best SAM system has a range of 6km. Iran's has a range of at least 32KM. Our AShM has a range of 200km, much more than what the F-22P carries. 

I have already said on this forum that it is not a destroyer and no one has claimed this. It is a case "lost in translation". It is a frigate. The generic word "warship" in Persian could be translated to mean "destroyer" and that is what a journalist who knows nothing about the military has used the word Destroyer instead of the word Frigate.


----------



## TOPGUN

Abi said:


> It has a SAM with a range of at least 32km and and Anti-ship missiles with the range of 200km. That makes it more capable than the F-22P which has a SAM with a 6km range , and i would consider it advanced.
> 
> There are also plans to add the FM-90 (which Iran produces domestically) to it as well.



And when did i co compare it with the f-22p .. sorry but your fig's are wrong bro it is not advanced at all homework time for u although my congrats to Iran.


----------



## TOPGUN

StealthQL-707PK said:


> Bro, actually, it is not advanced destroyer.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please consider this *PNS Zulifqar Frigate *specificiation if you think it is advanced than F-22 equipped with *long range surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tonnes: *3144*
> 
> Speed: *29 knots*
> Complement: *202 crew (14 officers and 188 sailors)
> *
> Miles Range: *4,000 nautical miles*
> Helicopters (for Anti-Submarines): *Z-9EC *
> 
> Missiles:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Eight C-802/CSS-N-8 sub-sonic Saccade anti-ship missiles*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *-Eight-round FM-90 surface-to-air missile (SAM) *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Three ET-52C torpedoes*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- Latest Russian 76mm gun*
> 
> 
> *Including*
> - Close-in-Weapon System (CIWS)
> - sensors, electronic warfare and advanced command and control system
> - RDC-32 type rockets and electronic support and counter measures (ESM/ECM) systems
> 
> *Radars systems*
> - SUR 17 air surveillance radar
> - SR-60 air/surface search radar
> - KH 2007 navigation radar
> - Type 347 CIWS fire-control radar
> - CIWS electro-optical director
> - Radar warning receiver suite
> 
> PN recently received second PNS Shamsheer 252, third PNS Saif 253 (almost done) and last frigate sooner than expected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is my wingman haha thx bro for opening some closed eyes lolz


----------



## Abi

This ship's anti-ship and anti-air missiles have a larger range than the F-22P. Now lets not turn this into a X Vs. Y discussion. That is not what i intended to do. I was just giving you some specifications that you can compare with the F-22P.


----------



## unicorn148

The destroyer may or may not be advanced than f22p but they made it on their own (indigenous)


----------



## su-47

Abi said:


> It is a frigate. Journalists don't know anything about the military. Just yesterday, the BBC showed a video of an APC and called it a Tank. The journalists just used a dictionary and literally translated as a Destroyer in English. This is a frigate and the Iranian Navy has said this already in Persian.
> 
> By the way, there is nothing wrong with its' firepower, it has a SAM system with a range of at least 32km, . It also has anti-ship missiles with a range of 200km. That is more firepower than the F-22p.



I feel it might be a little too light to be a frigate. 1420 tonnes is larger than a standard corvette, but much lighter than a modern frigate. Even the lightest frigates are more than 3000t. Jamaran is more like a heavy corvette. The Turkish Milgem class has a 2000t displacement and is classified as a corvette. Ofcouse, I am basing all this on Western and Russian classification. Iran might use a different classification.

Abi, a ship's firepower is not measured just by the range of tis SAMs or AShMs, but also its systems, and more importantly, its integration with the rest of the Navy. Even 1970 era SAMs had great range. Also 200 km AShMs are meaningless unless the ship can track its opponents at 200km! So the AShMs range will be limited by the ship's radar effectiveness. Also, Jamaran seems to lack any stealth features, something that is common in 21st century warships.

Look I am not trying to put the ship down. My knowledge is not sufficient for me to carry out an in-depth study on this. But I do feel that this ship is limited by its size. It might not be able to take on larger vessels equipped with better radars and EW capabilities.

However, this hip can be very effective in conjunction with a destroyer, should Iran ever build/acquire one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cabatli_53

First of All Congrat for Iran nation...

I also think that Jamaran should not be classified like Destroyer cause of size and displacement based on Western standarts. I want to give some examples from Turkish ship programs by tonnages to enlighten this issue. 

Milgem Corvette= 2000 Tonnes
TF-100 Frigate = 3500-4000 tonnes (Planned)
TF-2000 AAW Destroyer = 6500-7000 Tonnes(Planned)

About Development criterias of a ship to call it like "Advanced" in current century depends on;

Stealth design characteristics
Stealth Paints
Stealth Materials
Decreased IR track not to be hunted by enemy missiles
Development of 3D radars
Sonar detection capabilities(Ceramic and transducer capabilities)
Torpedo countermeasure systems
The range of Anti-ship missiles along with Radars
Command-Control software effectiveness
Otonom detection-tracking capabilities and intelligent computer systems..


If Jamaran carries many of those, We can call it like Advanced...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Macbeth

Abi said:


> It isn't meant to act as a destroyer. Using your logic, the latest FACs in the world are useless because they're not as capable as destroyers?



tehn what does this mean "Iran launches advanced Jamaran destroyer "


----------



## Abi

ariel_sharon123 said:


> tehn what does this mean "Iran launches advanced Jamaran destroyer "



In Persian it means "Iran launches advanced warship".


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Hope Iran makes 10 Jamraans soon !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## no_name

It is very good achievement on behalf of iranian people and scientists but I also think it is more along the class of a frigate.

regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abi

no_name said:


> It is very good achievement on behalf of iranian people and scientists but I also think it is more along the class of a frigate.
> 
> regards,



It is a Frigate according to the Iranian Navy. You see, "warship" in Persian sort of translates into "destroyer" and journalists cannot tell the difference between a Frigate and a Destroyer.


----------

