What's new

Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

sahureka2

FULL MEMBER
Apr 23, 2016
856
0
2,665
Country
Italy
Location
Italy
I think a better option than the 8 diesels with their associated undesirable large penalties of weight and complexity,not to mention all the extra space required if one goes for a mechanical shaft drive arraignment rather than an electric drive,would be to look at marinising one of mapnas gas turbine sets,something like the mgt-30 would be an excellent choice with its 25mw+ output.
Another option would be marinising locomotive diesel electric generator sets for naval use.
Personally I think that combined diesel and gas electric is the way of the future for warships.
I think that one of the biggest impediments to the future development of the navy and its blue water fleet is the extreme conservativeness on the part of avy when it comes to warship design and also its fixation upon the big items such as hulls while neglecting the equally important ancillary systems that are going to go into and on that hull,ie the failure to develop a credible naval sam system or even a much simpler ciws before these ships went into service,ideally these systems would`ve been designed,built and tested in parallel with the construction of the rest of the ship.
..... .
As I wrote the best choice would be a CODAG, turbines for top speed and diesel for economy speed, but also electric propulsion, gas turbine generator, or electric-motor diesel generator would be a great choice.
But for both of them you have to master the technology perfectly.
It is not easy to naval gas turbines, very few nations have developed these capabilities, ditto for electric propulsion.
Therefore my hypothesis of 8 diesel engines was only a low risk choice, since in the CODAD version with 4 diesel engines it has already been tested on at least the SAHAND 74, a possible choice, if the others are not viable.
.
 
Last edited:

sahureka2

FULL MEMBER
Apr 23, 2016
856
0
2,665
Country
Italy
Location
Italy
IRIS Naghdi (82) as you can see indicated by the orange arrow, the twin 40/56 mm is no longer present.
Who knows maybe it will be replaced by the new Kamand 30mm CIWS ?!
 

Sina-1

FULL MEMBER
Sep 15, 2016
913
1
3,152
Country
Iran, Islamic Republic Of
Location
Sweden
Therefore my hypothesis of 8 diesel engines was only a low risk choice, since in the CODAD version with 4 diesel engines it has already been tested on at least the SAHAND 74, a possible choice, if the others are not viable.
.
I will admit that my knowledge in regards to ships and their propulsion is very low. So keep that in mind. However, as an engineer with fundamental knowledge regarding combustion engines, gears and shafts on the one hand and gas turbines and generators on the other, I have to say that to me it is not so clear why the aforementioned is more of a low risk. 8 engines will need an intricate gear and shaft integration. So the overall system is IMO more complex than gas turbine + generator + electric motor.
Also I don't think we need to compare so much with other countries. Many seagoing nations had 50+ years experience with combustion engines before introducing gas turbines. Obviously their legacy will have made the transition difficult. Iran on the other hand has very recently mastered both combustion engines and gas turbines.

In conclusion, my dream scenario would be for Iran to develop extremely robust gas turbines because that would be easily scalable and the overall solution is IMO simpler and more elegant.
 

sahureka2

FULL MEMBER
Apr 23, 2016
856
0
2,665
Country
Italy
Location
Italy
I will admit that my knowledge in regards to ships and their propulsion is very low. So keep that in mind. However, as an engineer with fundamental knowledge regarding combustion engines, gears and shafts on the one hand and gas turbines and generators on the other, I have to say that to me it is not so clear why the aforementioned is more of a low risk. 8 engines will need an intricate gear and shaft integration. So the overall system is IMO more complex than gas turbine + generator + electric motor.
Also I don't think we need to compare so much with other countries. Many seagoing nations had 50+ years experience with combustion engines before introducing gas turbines. Obviously their legacy will have made the transition difficult. Iran on the other hand has very recently mastered both combustion engines and gas turbines.

In conclusion, my dream scenario would be for Iran to develop extremely robust gas turbines because that would be easily scalable and the overall solution is IMO simpler and more elegant.
I'm not talking about the complexity of construction, certainly my hypothesis has more gearboxes, more motors, more propeller shafts, more etc. For low risk I indicate why this propulsive solution (CODAD) has already been implemented in Iran and is operational at least on the Sahand-74, therefore a solution that could be repeated and expanded in number having gained direct knowledge of the components and their use.
In repeating myself, a CODAG configuration would be a better option, then also the different configurations to use electric motors; but with these we should still be in the field of research and design, yes, perhaps something has developed in the propulsion sector of diesel-electric submarines, but to push a heavy destroyer you need something much more powerful.
However mine, indeed ours, are only hypotheses; instead in a recent interview it was stated:
"In the defense ministry we are working on the construction of a 6,000-ton destroyer in the long-run," he said, "Executive preparations of the project will commence this year."
Therefore I think that the Iranian Navy has already planned the type of engines and the type of propulsion it will have to install on this destroyer.
 

Sineva

SENIOR MEMBER
May 24, 2018
2,490
-3
5,122
Country
Australia
Location
Korea, Democratic Peoples Republic Of
Do U know if these MGT series are German (siemens) designs or Iranian design..I assume all components are now built in Iran.
Iran doesnt just build them it also redesigns and improves them considerably as we saw with the MGT-70.I suspect this was one of the reasons why siemens did partially honor its deal to supply iran with F Class turbine technology to enable the local manufacturing,and redesign too no doubt,of F Class turbines in iran.

https://financialtribune.com/articl...na-unveils-improved-best-in-class-gas-turbine

"Majid Bahmani, managing director of MAPNA Turbine Engineering and Manufacturing Company, a subsidiary of the group, told the same conference that the 2.2% increase in efficiency of third-generation MGT-70 turbine is a significant technological leap.
To put it into context, Siemens, one of the world's biggest turbine manufacturers, introduced an E-Class turbine in the early 1990s with 37% efficiency, but it took the company over two decades to enhance the number by 3%," he said."
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,386
1
3,501
Do not use facts and logic with @VEVAK, it escapes him.

This man is saying use foreign engines on a destroyer:omghaha: and then follows up with blind confidence that Russia and China would supply Eastern engines.

It’s as if for the last 30 years Iran hasn’t been screwed over in engine technology for aircrafts,tanks, etc. but suddenly Russia and China will line up to provide Iran’s destroyer fleet access to engine tech. I’m still waiting for the RD-33 Iran ordered in 2003 for Shafaq to show up. Maybe Vevak can reach out to Russia customer service and see what the hold up is?

Like I said Iranian engineers are keenly aware of the challenges they face. The French engine fiasco showed that even for a frigate the West will not allow Iran easy access. So imagine what would happen if Iran tries to build Destroyers and Cruisers? You can be damn sure that US and EU would sanction any company helping Iran to build these massive ships. So if Iran doesn’t have control over the key parts of a ships supply chain, THEN DONT BUILD IT!
Yea cause Iran has never been able to build and provide propulsion for a ship heavier than the Sahand!
Honestly how hard is it for you to think a little?

And the idea that you are somehow privy to every purchase and transfer of every part and component to and from Iran is without a doubt nothing more than your own personal delusion.

FYI 50 RD-33's would be barely enough to power and maintain 20 MiG-29's and if they were ever transferred to Iran more likely than not that would be the ONLY thing they would be used for because Iran's Airforce would have to be out of it's mind to chose 40 potential Iranian Shafaq's over 20 MiG-29's!
And lets be clear, you DO NOT know if they have or have not been transferred.

The rest, meaning info like putting RD-33's on Iranian designed fighters was nothing more than propaganda, guesses & assumptions of military annalists and hopes and dreams of regular Iranian military enthusiasts.

FYI a 3000-4000 ton warship is far from massive!
I suggest you get out that little bubble you've been living in

List of active Pakistan Navy ships - Wikipedia

List of active ships of the Turkish Naval Forces - Wikipedia

List of ships of the Egyptian Navy - Wikipedia

Royal Saudi Navy - Wikipedia
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,386
1
3,501
well when Iran Navy built Moudge Frigate they planned for a certain amount its not like you abandon certain ships when new ship design are prepared . this class of ships serve a purpose . when you built bigger ships they serve another purpose.

and we still don't have propulsion for bigger ships

Hatta bara Iran-Kashan motor Hyundai yani yeh motor as keshvaron mote'ahheadeh blook gharb entkhab shood!
Iran Kashan container ship – ISOICO

Moshkel e peeshron sarreh entekhabot masouleen khodmooneh!

Vaghti as Faranseh o Koreh jonobi motor mekhareen behtareh montazereh avagheb tahreem ha sham bosheen

Maloomeh keh Khareedori peesh'ron as cheen beh marateb rahat tar as khareedori peeshron as Faranseh or Koreh Jonobiest

Yanni ean ha hamash yeh bahooneh ast
 

sahureka2

FULL MEMBER
Apr 23, 2016
856
0
2,665
Country
Italy
Location
Italy
I hope we can to see Iran complete its bigger more advanced surface vessels so that future joint training excursuses will portray Iran's NAVY is much more 'modern' light so to say.
However, despite the fact that the NAGHDI 82 in October will celebrate 58 years from the date of construction, this old lady of the sea is still in excellent condition, therefore an applause goes to the engineers, technicians and workers of the Bandar Abbas shipyard who, in addition to maintaining it operationally and aesthetically in these excellent conditions, he continues to update it with new weapon systems that have allowed him to expand the type of mission he can go on.
 

VEVAK

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 24, 2013
2,386
1
3,501
Iran doesnt just build them it also redesigns and improves them considerably as we saw with the MGT-70.I suspect this was one of the reasons why siemens did partially honor its deal to supply iran with F Class turbine technology to enable the local manufacturing,and redesign too no doubt,of F Class turbines in iran.

https://financialtribune.com/articl...na-unveils-improved-best-in-class-gas-turbine

"Majid Bahmani, managing director of MAPNA Turbine Engineering and Manufacturing Company, a subsidiary of the group, told the same conference that the 2.2% increase in efficiency of third-generation MGT-70 turbine is a significant technological leap.
To put it into context, Siemens, one of the world's biggest turbine manufacturers, introduced an E-Class turbine in the early 1990s with 37% efficiency, but it took the company over two decades to enhance the number by 3%," he said."
(2) Iran Esfarayen Steel Complex: producing gigantic rotor shaft ایران فولاد اسفراین: تولید شفت روتور - YouTube
 

vizier

FULL MEMBER
Mar 7, 2009
483
0
336
Country
Turkey
Location
Turkey
Twin hull stealth catamarans seem to be promising in future anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare in my opinion


This one uses supercavitation in both of its hulls

Ghost-Stealth-Ship-2.jpg

Still it uses underwater bladed propeller which can be noisy and can be detected by other submarines. Although it can escape from ship- airborne radars or infrared detectors if it is shielded well.

I think the propulsion can be made by bladeless propeller like jetoptera.

The propellers can be under the mainbody - passenger section above the sea surface. Since it is bladeless it wont contribute to radar cross section and it will be under the main body of the ship concealed from outside only visible from front and from back and there wont be any blades reflecting radar back.



jetoptera.png


This way it can work on both against submarines(no noise under sea) and ships(radar-ir stealth) in my opinion
 
Last edited:

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


Top Bottom