What's new

Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

TheImmortal

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 11, 2017
3,598
-10
5,962
Country
United States
Location
United States
How many speed boats covering coastal water would be enough for them to move on to larger crafts?

Instead of 340 ~20 ton vessels the IRGC should instead be building 50 or more ~120 ton vessel....
These are for swarm tatics. Used in nature where a swarm of bees will sacrifice themself by jumping on an hornet to raise its body temperature and fry its brain. Or else a single hornet can kill hundreds of bees by itself.

Iran quite frankly needs thousands upon thousands of these to protect the PG during war.

A few cruisers would be obliterated during war. Much harder to take out speedboats that blend in the water.

100 speed boats firing 2 CMs is 200 CMs coming at a carrier or cruiser strike group that is attempting to defend against PG missiles and UAVs at the same time.
 

OldTwilight

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 10, 2016
2,581
-1
3,564
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
These are for swarm tatics. Used in nature where a swarm of bees will sacrifice themself by jumping on an hornet to raise its body temperature and fry its brain. Or else a single hornet can kill hundreds of bees by itself.

Iran quite frankly needs thousands upon thousands of these to protect the PG during war.

A few cruisers would be obliterated during war. Much harder to take out speedboats that blend in the water.

100 speed boats firing 2 CMs is 200 CMs coming at a carrier or cruiser strike group that is attempting to defend against PG missiles and UAVs at the same time.
in real war , the number of our actual shot will be around 3-4 at any ships at best ... unless one side of conflict is routed and get disorganized , then you can't see much fire work and annihilations ...

USA army these days is like of Mongol Hords of Genchiz era , they have both quantity and quality on their side ....

we can probably beat France , UK in our region , but US is in different level and I doubt we can do much without nuclear deterrence in all out fight ...

for US public , only first few Ships and first few hundred causalities is hard to witstand , from then they will go in revenge mode ...

They prepared themselves to lose 70-100 fighter in 1991 against Iraq , so if need arose , they can prepare to lose more than 200 fighters against Iran .... and unlike 1991 , they have so many old Fighter jets which are close to their retire date ...

so , without having ability to nuke USA mainland , going to war with them is lost cause ... in best , we will enter in war of attrition and due their superiors economy , industry , agriculture and infrastructure , they will win ...
 
Last edited:

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,512
These are for swarm tatics. Used in nature where a swarm of bees will sacrifice themself by jumping on an hornet to raise its body temperature and fry its brain. Or else a single hornet can kill hundreds of bees by itself.

Iran quite frankly needs thousands upon thousands of these to protect the PG during war.

A few cruisers would be obliterated during war. Much harder to take out speedboats that blend in the water.

100 speed boats firing 2 CMs is 200 CMs coming at a carrier or cruiser strike group that is attempting to defend against PG missiles and UAVs at the same time.
1612862241350.png





Yes in one scenario you have 100 speed boats firing 200 AShCM from within 40km + 100 rocket boats that have to get within 5km to have any change of doing any damage and against a well armed Navy they are more of a decoy + 100 boat dropping mines & other weapons....
I'm not saying the tactic isn't potentially effective! However if you don't evolve and change, enhance and or modify your tactics it allow an appointment to adapt and counter a lot easier....

For example they can simply remain out of reach of the combat range of such boats and simply focus all their efforts on their fuel stations....

So again, how many speed boats would be enough for them to move on?

50 ~120 ton FAC would also be able to fire 200 AShCM at potentially 3-4 times the targeting range!
They would also be able to carry far more capable com's and data links for the guidance and control of unmanned systems. They can be equipped with CIWS for better defense against incoming threats.
And MOST IMPORTANTLY they have a far greater combat range!
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,512
in real war , the number of our actual shot will be around 3-4 at any ships at best ... unless one side of conflict is routed and get disorganized , then you can't see much fire work and annihilations ...

USA army these days is like of Mongol Hords of Genchiz era , they have both quantity and quality on their side ....

we can probably beat France , UK in our region , but US is in different level and I doubt we can do much without nuclear deterrence in all out fight ...

for US public , only first few Ships and first few hundred causalities is hard to witstand , from then they will go in revenge mode ...

They prepared themselves to lose 70-100 fighter in 1991 against Iraq , so if need arose , they can prepare to lose more than 200 fighters against Iran .... and unlike 1991 , they have so many old Fighter jets which are close to their retire date ...

so , without having ability to nuke USA mainland , going to war with them is lost cause ... in best , we will enter in war of attrition and due their superiors economy , industry , agriculture and infrastructure , they will win ...
3-4 subsonic AShCM at any modern well armed ship would NOT be sufficient enough to pass through their defenses.

Main problem I see with swarm of speed boats is range! U.S. Navy would have to be insane to initiate a conflict with Iran from within the combat range of such tactics or even within range of most Iranian coastal anti ship missile systems.
Why would they do that when they can simply soften Iran up from 1000km out using aircrafts, drones & missiles?
By the time US naval fleet gets within 100km of Iranian coastal waters we would have no fuel stations or docks left to fuel swarms of limited ranged missile boats!

It's a tactical & strategic error to restrict the IRGC to within the Persian Gulf as is the decision to continue to acquire vessel over a 2 decade old tactic that the Americans have had 20 years to address...

IRGC Navy has sufficient number of within 500km ranged assets to move on and restrict most of their acquisitions to beyond that range.

If it was me, for the same tonnage of raw materials of my overall yearly acquisitions (lets say for example 10,000 tons for vessels) I would have instead focused on the infrastructure required to produce the following averaged on yearly bases for the next decade (meaning if it takes you 10 years to build one 1000 ton sub then build 10 at a time):

6 ~120-tone U boats + 1 ~1000-tone sub + 24 120 tone FAC like the tondar + 1 1200-ton Landing crafts + 4 ~250 ton small tankers + 12 ~ 20 tone Missile boats/Torpedo boats + 50 10-ton remotely operated vessel + the rest would go towards offshore fuel stations with hidden underwater fuel tanks...

then after a decade I would reassess and shift towards mostly + 1000 tone vessels equipped with VLS....
As for costs, so long as the vessel are mostly domestically produced what ever you spend on them will get recycled into your economy. And on top of the fact that it secures your shipping, it creates jobs, develops infrastructure, advances your technology & engineering in a wide range of industries,...

Sepah Navy should have a 30 year plan to cover this entire area to allow the Navy to focus on everything beyond
1612873448036.png
 

aryobarzan

FULL MEMBER
Feb 17, 2019
1,469
1
4,387
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Canada
3-4 subsonic AShCM at any modern well armed ship would NOT be sufficient enough to pass through their defenses.

Main problem I see with swarm of speed boats is range! U.S. Navy would have to be insane to initiate a conflict with Iran from within the combat range of such tactics or even within range of most Iranian coastal anti ship missile systems.
Why would they do that when they can simply soften Iran up from 1000km out using aircrafts, drones & missiles?
By the time US naval fleet gets within 100km of Iranian coastal waters we would have no fuel stations or docks left to fuel swarms of limited ranged missile boats!

It's a tactical & strategic error to restrict the IRGC to within the Persian Gulf as is the decision to continue to acquire vessel over a 2 decade old tactic that the Americans have had 20 years to address...

IRGC Navy has sufficient number of within 500km ranged assets to move on and restrict most of their acquisitions to beyond that range.

If it was me, for the same tonnage of raw materials of my overall yearly acquisitions (lets say for example 10,000 tons for vessels) I would have instead focused on the infrastructure required to produce the following averaged on yearly bases for the next decade (meaning if it takes you 10 years to build one 1000 ton sub then build 10 at a time):

6 ~120-tone U boats + 1 ~1000-tone sub + 24 120 tone FAC like the tondar + 1 1200-ton Landing crafts + 4 ~250 ton small tankers + 12 ~ 20 tone Missile boats/Torpedo boats + 50 10-ton remotely operated vessel + the rest would go towards offshore fuel stations with hidden underwater fuel tanks...

then after a decade I would reassess and shift towards mostly + 1000 tone vessels equipped with VLS....
As for costs, so long as the vessel are mostly domestically produced what ever you spend on them will get recycled into your economy. And on top of the fact that it secures your shipping, it creates jobs, develops infrastructure, advances your technology & engineering in a wide range of industries,...

Sepah Navy should have a 30 year plan to cover this entire area to allow the Navy to focus on everything beyond
View attachment 714888
Build as many subs as you can to operate in the green area..Fath sub is best option ..I Know how difficult and resource intensive it is to locate a sub so imagine 12 hunter Fatehs lurking in the green area..No enemy ship will be safe. Western navy's nightmares are enemy subs... not surface or air assets .
 

Arash1991

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Nov 11, 2020
10
0
47
Country
Germany
Location
Germany
How many speed boats covering coastal water would be enough for them to move on to larger crafts?

Instead of 340 ~20 ton vessels the IRGC should instead be building 50 or more ~120 ton vessel....
Smaller and faster vessels are not detectable for radar.I think its a very good strategy to equip very small vessels with AS missiles between 35km to 200 km range. US warships can detect them only in visual range or close beyond. Even if detected they will be faster with bigger maneuverability.
3-4 subsonic AShCM at any modern well armed ship would NOT be sufficient enough to pass through their defenses.

Main problem I see with swarm of speed boats is range! U.S. Navy would have to be insane to initiate a conflict with Iran from within the combat range of such tactics or even within range of most Iranian coastal anti ship missile systems.
Why would they do that when they can simply soften Iran up from 1000km out using aircrafts, drones & missiles?
By the time US naval fleet gets within 100km of Iranian coastal waters we would have no fuel stations or docks left to fuel swarms of limited ranged missile boats!

It's a tactical & strategic error to restrict the IRGC to within the Persian Gulf as is the decision to continue to acquire vessel over a 2 decade old tactic that the Americans have had 20 years to address...

IRGC Navy has sufficient number of within 500km ranged assets to move on and restrict most of their acquisitions to beyond that range.

If it was me, for the same tonnage of raw materials of my overall yearly acquisitions (lets say for example 10,000 tons for vessels) I would have instead focused on the infrastructure required to produce the following averaged on yearly bases for the next decade (meaning if it takes you 10 years to build one 1000 ton sub then build 10 at a time):

6 ~120-tone U boats + 1 ~1000-tone sub + 24 120 tone FAC like the tondar + 1 1200-ton Landing crafts + 4 ~250 ton small tankers + 12 ~ 20 tone Missile boats/Torpedo boats + 50 10-ton remotely operated vessel + the rest would go towards offshore fuel stations with hidden underwater fuel tanks...

then after a decade I would reassess and shift towards mostly + 1000 tone vessels equipped with VLS....
As for costs, so long as the vessel are mostly domestically produced what ever you spend on them will get recycled into your economy. And on top of the fact that it secures your shipping, it creates jobs, develops infrastructure, advances your technology & engineering in a wide range of industries,...

Sepah Navy should have a 30 year plan to cover this entire area to allow the Navy to focus on everything beyond
View attachment 714888
I disagree in some point. it seems to me (correct me if im wrong) that in your eyes iranshould build no speed boats and concentrate only on long range systems. And They dont have a long term vision plan.

My Opinion as follows:
you definitely need several multiple level strategies which among other things also guarantee failure safety. I see such a strategy very clearly in the case of Iran. There are projects that are designed up to 2000 km, as well as systems that cover the Persian Gulf.
As an example, there are long-range programs: submarines of the Fateh class, AsBM, cruise missiles, OTh radar systems and various other decisions on a strategic level, e.g. positioning of certain systems in Yemen and Syria.

One of the main problems for Iran is not its inability to mass produce. But the technical development. Take the Fateh class submarines as an example. Only recently was it possible to equip these submarines so that they can remain under water for a long time. Not to mention the teething troubles these systems have. I don't think it would be good to put a system in mass production, especially if significant updates will follow shortly afterwards or certain errors have not been fixed.

1.)
 

Philosopher

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 5, 2020
3,516
16
9,245
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
United Kingdom
I am not as focused on the size of the vessels per se as I am which the missiles they are carrying, matter of fact their current size is an advantage. These current vessels are mostly equipped with Nasr type of missiles, whilst still a very potent capability, the relatively low range of Nasr is what is limiting these boats to become even more potent. What we need to see is the mass production line for supersonic cruise missiles i.e ramjets, These missiles not only provide much better speed, i.e reduced reaction time for the enemies, but they also can provide the range to cover most of the Persian Gulf allowing these vessels to fire from stand off ranges.

Even if they did not go down the air-breathing supersonic cruise missiles path, another tactic could have been to use dual use surface-to-air (SAM)/ anti-ship missile, for example the Iranian "Mehrab" and its variants have such dual capability and these have been available for over a decade. The Americans will be relying on their airpower to try and deal with these swarm boat tactics, so the SAM capability of such missiles will be a great counter to that, and of course just the notions Iran has 100's of SAMs scattered throughout the Persian Gulf on these mobile assets is a great added deterrence overall. Detection and communication could be the main challenge here (especially in heavy E-warfare environment) but it is still doable. Now this is just hypothetical, I have not seen such a missile used in the IRGC-N's vessels. Regardless of how its done, the IRGC-N needs to increase the range/speed of its missiles.

As for UAVs, the fact that swarm boats will be carrying swarm UAVs is something the enemies should dread. This is equally as potent as missiles because despite their cost-effective nature, these UAVs can cause havoc and the enemies either have to spend precious resource downing them, or risk the key components of their ships i.e radars be destroyed. They have no other choice.

So overall, these tactics are extremely potent in the Persian Gulf. I do not think any serious military mind is deluded enough to think the USN can deliver any serious effect in the Persian Gulf during a conflict. The term "sitting duck" is an accurate metaphor. But of course one cannot be complacent, tides can change so we must always be working to maintain this upper hand. IRGC's is clearly doing that given it is working on its own midget submarines, much faster boats etc.

The new Persian Gulf is the Indian Ocean. That is where Iran need to expand its deterrence into. First steps have been taken with the arrival of the Naval ship bases, but much more needs to be done. That area needs to become swarming with Iran's systems.
 

Mr Iran Eye

FULL MEMBER
Feb 6, 2019
217
0
455
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Iran's tactics in the Persian Gulf will be broad and full of surprises. Decoy, drone, electronic warfare, combat aircraft, air defense system on the seashore, submarine, mine, Seaplanes, Frogman, helicopter, watercraft, various combat vessels and more

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzaWS...jpg
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzasdgbrehathaerhaer...jpg
 

thesaint

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Dec 7, 2020
27
0
41
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
in real war , the number of our actual shot will be around 3-4 at any ships at best ... unless one side of conflict is routed and get disorganized , then you can't see much fire work and annihilations ...

USA army these days is like of Mongol Hords of Genchiz era , they have both quantity and quality on their side ....

we can probably beat France , UK in our region , but US is in different level and I doubt we can do much without nuclear deterrence in all out fight ...

for US public , only first few Ships and first few hundred causalities is hard to witstand , from then they will go in revenge mode ...

They prepared themselves to lose 70-100 fighter in 1991 against Iraq , so if need arose , they can prepare to lose more than 200 fighters against Iran .... and unlike 1991 , they have so many old Fighter jets which are close to their retire date ...

so , without having ability to nuke USA mainland , going to war with them is lost cause ... in best , we will enter in war of attrition and due their superiors economy , industry , agriculture and infrastructure , they will win ...
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,512
Smaller and faster vessels are not detectable for radar.I think its a very good strategy to equip very small vessels with AS missiles between 35km to 200 km range. US warships can detect them only in visual range or close beyond. Even if detected they will be faster with bigger maneuverability.


I disagree in some point. it seems to me (correct me if im wrong) that in your eyes iranshould build no speed boats and concentrate only on long range systems. And They dont have a long term vision plan.

My Opinion as follows:
you definitely need several multiple level strategies which among other things also guarantee failure safety. I see such a strategy very clearly in the case of Iran. There are projects that are designed up to 2000 km, as well as systems that cover the Persian Gulf.
As an example, there are long-range programs: submarines of the Fateh class, AsBM, cruise missiles, OTh radar systems and various other decisions on a strategic level, e.g. positioning of certain systems in Yemen and Syria.

One of the main problems for Iran is not its inability to mass produce. But the technical development. Take the Fateh class submarines as an example. Only recently was it possible to equip these submarines so that they can remain under water for a long time. Not to mention the teething troubles these systems have. I don't think it would be good to put a system in mass production, especially if significant updates will follow shortly afterwards or certain errors have not been fixed.

1.)
1. Max range of 35 km for AShCm is just not sufficient because it forces the craft to get within direct line of sight of large vessels. That's why we have rocket boats which will mostly serve as decoys
That said, the enemy vessel would have to be within the combat radius of your missile boats ~300km at max. So enemy vessel parked +500km from Iranian territorial waters will remain untouchable.

2. I didn't say Iran shouldn't build any more missile boats! Azarakh & Zolfaghar Missile boats are approximately in the 20 ton class range


1612954380377.png



And anything smaller like the Seraj class 10-ton class range should strictly be remotely operated

3. You don't refrain from building platform because a certain potential system or subsystem upgrade has yet to be developed.
You don't say I'm not going to produce a fighter jet because I have yet to master Airborne X-Band AESA radars.
You don't say I have yet to develop AIP system so I'm not gonna produce subs! That's absurd!

4.If the IRGC Navy isn't planning 10, 20, 30 years down the line (Which I doubt) then we are in really big trouble!

5.For targeting at 150km you would at the very least need a 120 ton vessel. The reason Iran doesn't put +45 km ranged missiles on it's Missile boats is because they wouldn't be able to target at beyond that range anyways...

This is a 120ton class vessel

1612956486446.png
 

ashool

FULL MEMBER
Nov 12, 2016
296
-1
401
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
"ro dar ro ba sheytan"

Typical akhoondi title. Are they ever going to grow up?
the pinochio becam human u stupid برعنداز dont sorry for sheep some people name them برعنداز
بابا هر کی بلند میشه یه عکس ایران باستان فر وهر .... میزاره برای خودش میشه ملیگرا ولی از هر چی عنگلیسی زبان عرعرستانی بدتره بابا ادم شید برید پیش فرشته التماس کنید شاید یه خاکی تو سر شما ریخت والا ان بدبختم دیگه از رو رفت اگه سکته کنه تا اخرش یا پینوکیو میمونید یا میشد ان قسمتش که پینوکیو خر میشه
 

Shawnee

FULL MEMBER
Jan 22, 2020
1,448
0
2,633
Country
United States
Location
United Kingdom
the pinochio becam human u stupid برعنداز dont sorry for sheep some people name them برعنداز
بابا هر کی بلند میشه یه عکس ایران باستان فر وهر .... میزاره برای خودش میشه ملیگرا ولی از هر چی عنگلیسی زبان عرعرستانی بدتره بابا ادم شید برید پیش فرشته التماس کنید شاید یه خاکی تو سر شما ریخت والا ان بدبختم دیگه از رو رفت اگه سکته کنه تا اخرش یا پینوکیو میمونید یا میشد ان قسمتش که پینوکیو خر میشه
ابی هفت سال پیش اینو گذاشته
نظرش هم بعد عوض شد و ادم جدیدی شد
شش ساله اینجا نیومده
پاک کن کامنتتو
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,391
1
3,512
Build as many subs as you can to operate in the green area..Fath sub is best option ..I Know how difficult and resource intensive it is to locate a sub so imagine 12 hunter Fatehs lurking in the green area..No enemy ship will be safe. Western navy's nightmares are enemy subs... not surface or air assets .
I totally agree that the best option to focus on for green waters and blue waters would be sub however subs lack various capabilities to compensate to be a viable replacement for every other type of vessel from speed to sensor to weapons capability both in payload and variety would all be lacking

A Fateh sub would not only need to get within weapons range but it also needs a sufficient number of payloads to counter enemy countermeasure and ensure a kill. And although the Fateh is a great achievement in the development of domestic subs and a necessary step towards larger subs, however the current fateh wouldn't be sufficient enough cover all the highlighted areas...
I also believe Iran is making the same mistake it made on the Jamaran with the Fateh class.

The time it took to build a 1500 ton Jamaran class would have been approximately the same if the ship was 3000-4000 tons with VLS and 10X the payload in terms of number of missiles. And if the vessel is domestically produced then what you would save on material costs would be insignificant compared to the man hours required to produce the vessel
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)


Top Bottom