What's new

Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

Awesome this forum !!

I who have often criticized General TheImmortal and his analyzes but now he has better valid arguments than Vevak. It's the world upside down and please dear Vevak, take a rest, you are very tired

:yahoo::yahoo::yahoo:
 
.
question:
observing the satellite images of the shipyard in Bandar Abbas,this naval unit is detected in the dry dock, which seems to me to be the support ship "Konarak"
df6ce8d62603426a203e1dc88145b46co.png
that was accidentally hit by a missile in 2020,
ab2c0aabf4a5ccd39021e1061c7e1de3o.jpg


so I ask users of this forum if you have news of a possible reconstruction of the "Konarak" to return to operational service?
Thanks in advance

Thanks in advance
 
.
Again the more you talk the more you make my point.

Your thoughts are borderline delusional. You say Iran could make 3000-4000 warship in 2008 because they can make VLCCs then contradict yourself shortly after to make my point.

Iran took a decade to bring Jamaran basically a modernized 1970’s frigate design to fruition. It’s shipyards are not as advanced and capable as Russian or Chinese shipyards.

So this notion that Iran could have built a modern destroyer in 2008 with the tools (radar, engines, sub systems, air defense, shipyard capability, etc) it had at its disposal is not rooted in reality.

And let’s say for sake of argument Iran created one 4000 destroyer in 2008 compared to 4-5 Mowj’s during the same time. What use is one destroyer again a Superpower?

Like I said Iran is taking the right approach in this field. The old Vevak has reared his head and like the past has wonderful ideas that hundreds of engineers were too stupid to consider at the time. I am sure that is the case. Add these ideas to your “wonder weapons” ideas you were sprouting 3-4 years ago and you get a pattern of delusional thinking.

There is nothing wonderous about building 3000-4000 ton hull so you can accommodate more missiles as appose to a 2000-2500 ton Sahand especially in a country that's already building 10,000 tone hulls

I'm questioning the continuation of the Mowj/Jamaran class over the past 25 years not the decision that lead to the development of Irans 1st frigate. The decision to build the Jamaran was a necessary step no one is questioning that! The mistake is getting stuck on that step rather than pushing yourself forward...


4 Mowj class can in total carry how many cruise missiles? How many air defense missiles? And my criticism over the continuation of the Mowj class is strictly related to the limited number of arms that ship carries!

And the use is rather obvious! Deterrence, Power projection, Defensive, Offensive....
 
.
There is nothing wonderous about building 3000-4000 ton hull so you can accommodate more missiles as appose to a 2000-2500 ton Sahand especially in a country that's already building 10,000 tone hulls

I'm questioning the continuation of the Mowj/Jamaran class over the past 25 years not the decision that lead to the development of Irans 1st frigate. The decision to build the Jamaran was a necessary step no one is questioning that! The mistake is getting stuck on that step rather than pushing yourself forward...


4 Mowj class can in total carry how many cruise missiles? How many air defense missiles? And my criticism over the continuation of the Mowj class is strictly related to the limited number of arms that ship carries!

And the use is rather obvious! Deterrence, Power projection, Defensive, Offensive....

More missiles =/= better weapon

First of all this vessel wouldn’t even make it out of the PG during wartime so where would all this firepower be used?

In 2008, Iran has just acquired TOR-M1. It had some Hawk systems, S-200, and the old SM missile. Nothing suitable for a destroyer class.

For weapons, it had no Soumar cruise missile or any of the new longer range or stealth CMs revealed and was still on early gen F-110. It’s UAV technology lacked RQ-170 and suicide drones

It was behind on naval radar technology and engine (no eagle eye).

So again your assertion that 2008 Iran could build a competitive destroyer not rooted in reality.

Iran has begun building destroyer class projects now for the future And gained valuable knowledge from Mowj vessels. There shipbuilding has been very slow and I’m not sure if it’s lack of material or funds that caused this.
 
.
More missiles =/= better weapon

First of all this vessel wouldn’t even make it out of the PG during wartime so where would all this firepower be used?

In 2008, Iran has just acquired TOR-M1. It had some Hawk systems, S-200, and the old SM missile. Nothing suitable for a destroyer class.

For weapons, it had no Soumar cruise missile or any of the new longer range or stealth CMs revealed and was still on early gen F-110. It’s UAV technology lacked RQ-170 and suicide drones

It was behind on naval radar technology and engine (no eagle eye).

So again your assertion that 2008 Iran could build a competitive destroyer not rooted in reality.

Iran has begun building destroyer class projects now for the future And gained valuable knowledge from Mowj vessels. There shipbuilding has been very slow and I’m not sure if it’s lack of material or funds that caused this.

The point you made about 2008 really shows how far Iran has come. Non of the western war planners likely never anticipated such growth and caught them off guard/surprise.
 
. .
More missiles =/= better weapon

First of all this vessel wouldn’t even make it out of the PG during wartime so where would all this firepower be used?

In 2008, Iran has just acquired TOR-M1. It had some Hawk systems, S-200, and the old SM missile. Nothing suitable for a destroyer class.

For weapons, it had no Soumar cruise missile or any of the new longer range or stealth CMs revealed and was still on early gen F-110. It’s UAV technology lacked RQ-170 and suicide drones

It was behind on naval radar technology and engine (no eagle eye).

So again your assertion that 2008 Iran could build a competitive destroyer not rooted in reality.

Iran has begun building destroyer class projects now for the future And gained valuable knowledge from Mowj vessels. There shipbuilding has been very slow and I’m not sure if it’s lack of material or funds that caused this.

I never said Iran should have never built the Jamaran ship as it's 1st frigate. My comment is about the continuation of the Jamaran class not the ship.

Yes Iran as a country had the infrastructure needed to build a larger warship (hull) and NO Iran's Navy by it's self did not have the experience needed to build any warship that wasn't already in it's fleet (regardless of it's size) and they chose to reverse engineer what they had and that lead to the Jamaran as a choice that would be a far less riskier option than designing their own.


So again and for the last time I am not questioning why Iran chose to build the Jamaran ship back in the late 90's or even the Sahand ship... my criticism is of why they chose to continue it in post ~2012 (After the sahand hull was competed) so again it's a matter of getting stuck on that 1st step not the necessary need to take it. By ~2012 Iran's Navy should have put it foot down and risked the design and construction of a domestically designed hull.

What Iran's Navy has accomplished is more than any other branch of the Artesh because unlike other branches they didn't sit around waiting for someone to hand them platforms and rather than sticking to the easy option they chose to reverse engineer the most capable platform they had but now it's time to move beyond that!

Also, when you construct platforms you do so with future weapons and upgrades in mind.

As for propulsion that was and is most definitely a major issue and more likely than not would of had to be imported. So what?


Building a domestically designed 3000-4000 ton warship would easily require a decade to complete which gives you plenty of time to design and produce the required infrastructure to produce systems and components needed accordingly
And I'm not saying anything Iran's navy doesn't already know and at some point wasn't already planning for
(2) Iran navy third generation of vessel design and build and development research center - YouTube


Radars and sensor are something that you can plan for to be later upgraded especially if you already know what potential upgrades are coming


Finally, who says the vessels wouldn't make it out of the Persian Gulf? Your assuming that the only threat Iran faces is the U.S. and the U.S. will wait for all Iranian warships to be docked before they attack. If that was the case then all Iran would have to do is keep 1/3 of it's fleet deployed at any given time to deter any potential threat.
And having a ship who by it's self is capable of disabling an Airforce base from 1000km out gives you a level of deterrence and power projection that normal Jamaran/class frigates do not possess
 
.
The point you made about 2008 really shows how far Iran has come. Non of the western war planners likely never anticipated such growth and caught them off guard/surprise.

Their western planners have been in an utter stat of shock for over 4 decades now!

Over the past 2 decades alone I don't think they have managed to go any more than 2-3 years without getting shocked over one Iranian Missile achievement over another and that's just in Missile tech alone.

And Iran's achievements have been so many that it put many of their analysts in an utter state of disbelief. Just a few years before Iran hit Al Assad they had official well known missile analysts claiming that Iran would need to fire 1000 missiles just to hit one office in Dubai.
Fact is Iran's achievements have been so many that many Iranians are also in a state of disbelief.
 
.
.....
As for propulsion that was and is most definitely a major issue and more likely than not would of had to be imported. So what?
....
Question:
Am I wrong or it was the great difficulties in importing the French high-power diesel engines and gearboxes that greatly postponed the completion of the works at Jamaran 76, Damavand 77 and probably also at Dena 75 (this remained for even longer in the shipyard) , and for these reasons later we opted for a scheme with 4 diesel engines but with lower unit power, as they are more easily available abroad (see the Caterpillar installed on the Sahand 74) and with the expectation of implementing Iranian design.
Precisely the absence or difficulty in finding high-powered diesel engines or adequate gas turbines, which certainly postponed the construction of heavy destroyers.
Therefore I think that making the hull and equipping it with all the electronic and armament systems was not and is not a problem for Iran, but if you do not already have an adequate engine system available you would risk putting a lame elephant into the sea, therefore it would be it is useless to start building it, also because the experience in the nautical sector, the innovation in systems and armaments make great strides quickly
Therefore it would not be profitable to build a ship with the intention of completing it when and if I have the adequate engine equipment at home, it would risk becoming obsolete even before entering the fleet.
Such the Dena 75, a ship begun to be built before the Sahand 74 but completed later and which evidently shows an old conception of the superstructures and probably in the realization of some internal compartments of the hull.
The class of these frigates cannot be considered unique, but each ship is a prototype that implements improvements deriving from the experience accumulated in the construction method, from the experience gained in the operational use of the ships built, from the nefarious results from the loss of Damavand, from testing different electronic systems and where and how to install some weapon systems and finally the implementation of the new 30mm CIWS or future VLS.
Therefore I think that the practice of small steps is correct, since all these experiences, have certainly led to significant changes to the heavy destroyer project and future naval units.
 
.
Question:
Am I wrong or it was the great difficulties in importing the French high-power diesel engines and gearboxes that greatly postponed the completion of the works at Jamaran 76, Damavand 77 and probably also at Dena 75 (this remained for even longer in the shipyard) , and for these reasons later we opted for a scheme with 4 diesel engines but with lower unit power, as they are more easily available abroad (see the Caterpillar installed on the Sahand 74) and with the expectation of implementing Iranian design.
Precisely the absence or difficulty in finding high-powered diesel engines or adequate gas turbines, which certainly postponed the construction of heavy destroyers.
Therefore I think that making the hull and equipping it with all the electronic and armament systems was not and is not a problem for Iran, but if you do not already have an adequate engine system available you would risk putting a lame elephant into the sea, therefore it would be it is useless to start building it, also because the experience in the nautical sector, the innovation in systems and armaments make great strides quickly
Therefore it would not be profitable to build a ship with the intention of completing it when and if I have the adequate engine equipment at home, it would risk becoming obsolete even before entering the fleet.
Such the Dena 75, a ship begun to be built before the Sahand 74 but completed later and which evidently shows an old conception of the superstructures and probably in the realization of some internal compartments of the hull.
The class of these frigates cannot be considered unique, but each ship is a prototype that implements improvements deriving from the experience accumulated in the construction method, from the experience gained in the operational use of the ships built, from the nefarious results from the loss of Damavand, from testing different electronic systems and where and how to install some weapon systems and finally the implementation of the new 30mm CIWS or future VLS.
Therefore I think that the practice of small steps is correct, since all these experiences, have certainly led to significant changes to the heavy destroyer project and future naval units.

In terms of propulsion systems the difficulties relate back to the fact that Iran chose a western design to reverse engineer and required western components that would match.

However, for a domestic design they would naturally have to purchase the propulsion systems before hand to be able to design around them. I very much doubt Iran would have trouble purchasing Chinese or Russian engines or even come to an agreement over coproduction inside Iran it's simply a matter of money.
 
. . .
In terms of propulsion systems the difficulties relate back to the fact that Iran chose a western design to reverse engineer and required western components that would match.

However, for a domestic design they would naturally have to purchase the propulsion systems before hand to be able to design around them. I very much doubt Iran would have trouble purchasing Chinese or Russian engines or even come to an agreement over coproduction inside Iran it's simply a matter of money.
Currently the Russians in the diesel sector could offer only 5600 hp Kolomna engines, but due to annual production capacity they can hardly offer it for export since all production is currently dedicated to the construction of the ships of their fleet, the same at the moment also in the turbine sector to naval gas, as they are making the first series wsemari and are also dedicated to their fleet.
Unlike the China question, they do not have diesel production problems, but it must be remembered that many models are produced under license and for export outside China they need an authorization from the parent company. They can offer some products with Chinese patent CHD622V20CR 3.600 kW / 5000 hp engines also sold to Russia to replace the MTU diesels subject to sanctions, these engines initially gave some faulty symptoms, but now it seems that the Chinese technicians have solved any problem. In the gas turbine sector, the Chinese have the QC-280s a national product derived from the Ukrainian turbines that are installed on the Type 055
 
Last edited:
.
Currently the Russians in the diesel sector could offer only 5600 hp Kolomna engines, but due to annual production capacity they can hardly offer it for export since all production is currently dedicated to the construction of the ships of their fleet, the same at the moment also in the turbine sector to naval gas, as they are making the first series wsemari and are also dedicated to their fleet.
Unlike the China question, they do not have diesel production problems, but it must be remembered that many models are produced under license and for export outside China they need an authorization from the parent company. They can offer some products with Chinese patent CHD622V20CR 3.600 kW / 5000 hp engines also sold to Russia to replace the MTU diesels subject to sanctions, these engines initially gave some faulty symptoms, but now it seems that the Chinese technicians have solved any problem. In the gas turbine sector, the Chinese have the QC-280s a national product derived from the Ukrainian turbines that are installed on the Type 055

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!
 
. .

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom