Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

[Fafnir]

Thanks but I didn't. There is no point in Iran trying to fight the USN in open sea.

It's just some the the weapons choices that baffle me a LOT.

For example look at these Quad C-802 launchers on a PN Zulfiqar.

The C-802 and the Noor/Qader are VERY similar for obvious reasons. They are of similar weight. Yet the Mowj class only has dual box mounted Noor/Qaders. So half the firepower of most surface ships its size for NO DISCERNABLE REASON. There is NO technological, financial or space saving reason for this example of under arming.

Excellent point,I`d always wondered why they hadnt gone for quad launchers,Its just one of those things that seems so utterly baffling and incomprehensible like the omitting of any ciws,one has to wonder why it simply wasnt done as there is no good reason for not doing it,.The the whole thing in general really just has me scratching my head.

 

[Stryker1982]

1st that's a Pakistani ship!

The most obvious reason would be the sensor & targeting capability of the ship!
If your targeting capability tops out at 150km you'll be ok with a 120km noor missile and there is no reason for you to have 300km missile on your vessel
And there is no reason why Iran should throw away it's the Noor missiles when they can easily place them on older patrol boats like the Kalat class

Yes it doesn't make sense to produce the Noor Missile anymore if the Qaders are fully ready to go! But your not going to throw them away either

That's not what he was saying, he was wondering why the hell Iran doesn't use Quad launchers, all Iranian frigates are dual C-802s. Why don't they use Quad launchers, they just half'd the firepower for no conceivable reason. Under arming for no apparent reason.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Thanks but I didn't. There is no point in Iran trying to fight the USN in open sea.

It's just some the the weapons choices that baffle me a LOT.

For example look at these Quad C-802 launchers on a PN Zulfiqar.

The C-802 and the Noor/Qader are VERY similar for obvious reasons. They are of similar weight. Yet the Mowj class only has dual box mounted Noor/Qaders. So half the firepower of most surface ships its size for NO DISCERNABLE REASON. There is NO technological, financial or space saving reason for this example of under arming.

Put em even on FACs 600 tons

i count 8 launchers?

While PNS Himmat carries 6 Pak ASHMs:

 

[sahureka2]

Put em even on FACs 600 tons

i count 8 launchers?
View attachment 422415

While PNS Himmat carries 6 Pak ASHMs:

View attachment 422416

great, powerful anti-ship ability,

but!
has a medium-sized cannon (Fajr -27 - 76/62) able to engage naval targets (16km) and anti-aircraft?
No!
has missile systems for anti-aircraft defense?
No!
it has ASW defense systems (324 mm torpedo tubes)
No!
is it able to host an ASW helicopter?
No!

Iranian frigates have multifunctional capabilities covering all sectors: anti-ship, anti-aircraft, ASW.
perhaps it would require a CIWS system with the highest cadence in AK-630 style or Chinese version, replacing the Fath 40 mm

 

[VEVAK]

That's not what he was saying, he was wondering why the hell Iran doesn't use Quad launchers, all Iranian frigates are dual C-802s. Why don't they use Quad launchers, they just half'd the firepower for no conceivable reason. Under arming for no apparent reason.

1. Since Iran is not likely to be the one that starts a war their current threat assessment likely shows the ships will likely be destroyed in face of current threats before they could manage to deliver more than 4 missiles beyond 200 km

2. If the U.S. wanted to attack Iran they'll likely wait till a day or a time when most of Iranian ships are docked allowing them to takeout 90% of Iran's Blue water navy in a single strike at Bandar Abbas + 70% of Iranian FAC (120 ft or larger) parked at Bandar Abbas or Bushehr

3.If Iran wanted greater Blue Water capability 1st and foremost they would have to keep over 50% of the fleet at sea
BUT what would be the pro's and con's of doing that without an increase in budget? If Iran's Navy allocates it's financial resources towards fuel costs rather than R&D & it's human resources towards manning ships rather than Naval R&D would the benefits out way the costs? And the answer is they do NOT neither in terms of the countries Naval development or in terms of long term naval capability!

But with the Navy's current budget it makes more sense to allocate your resources as such so you can expand on the number of vessels you have until the countries naval production capabilities reaches a satisfactory point.


Now you may argue that adding 25-50 more missiles to the Navy isn't really a big deal & that may be true but with the Navy's current budget that may be the difference of adding a new Fatteh class sub or frigate to your fleet

4.Anti-ship missiles are produced and delivered by the MOD so Iran's Navy has to wait around till they get the next shipment Sahand has been waiting for it's missiles for some time now

Also, these are the problems you face when you start basing everything from the Karrar to Antiship missiles to Air to Ground missiles, other UCAV's & other aircrafts like jet trainers on the Toloue engines without drastically increasing the production capacity of that engine!
And if your production capacity is limited (due to the number of tool's & facilities) it doesn't matter much how cheep or expensive the engines come out too because it's not the cost of the engine that's limiting your production.

 

[AmirPatriot]

1st that's a Pakistani ship!

So?

The most obvious reason would be the sensor & targeting capability of the ship!
If your targeting capability tops out at 150km you'll be ok with a 120km noor missile and there is no reason for you to have 300km missile on your vessel
And there is no reason why Iran should throw away it's the Noor missiles when they can easily place them on older patrol boats like the Kalat class

Yes it doesn't make sense to produce the Noor Missile anymore if the Qaders are fully ready to go! But your not going to throw them away either

I was talking about quantity, not quality.

1. Since Iran is not likely to be the one that starts a war their current threat assessment likely shows the ships will likely be destroyed in face of current threats before they could manage to deliver more than 4 missiles beyond 200 km

2. If the U.S. wanted to attack Iran they'll likely wait till a day or a time when most of Iranian ships are docked allowing them to takeout 90% of Iran's Blue water navy in a single strike at Bandar Abbas + 70% of Iranian FAC (120 ft or larger) parked at Bandar Abbas or Bushehr

That's silly. There is no point even having a navy if you don't intend for it to be equipped for any feasible situation, whatever the perceived enemy.

Why even make a 300+ ft long ship if you don't intend to arm it properly.

Now you may argue that adding 25-50 more missiles to the Navy isn't really a big deal & that may be true but with the Navy's current budget that may be the difference of adding a new Fatteh class sub or frigate to your fleet

I'm sure @PeeD can tell you how cheap these missiles are, and believe me they make them like candy. They fire off 300 km Qaders like they are nothing in annual war games.

4.Anti-ship missiles are produced and delivered by the MOD so Iran's Navy has to wait around till they get the next shipment Sahand has been waiting for it's missiles for some time now

I'm betting Iran has hundreds of Noors in stockpiles. Remember, we have loads of shore based launchers as well.

 

[VEVAK]

So?



I was talking about quantity, not quality.



That's silly. There is no point even having a navy if you don't intend for it to be equipped for any feasible situation, whatever the perceived enemy.

Why even make a 300+ ft long ship if you don't intend to arm it properly.



I'm sure @PeeD can tell you how cheap these missiles are, and believe me they make them like candy. They fire off 300 km Qaders like they are nothing in annual war games.



I'm betting Iran has hundreds of Noors in stockpiles. Remember, we have loads of shore based launchers as well.

I miss read your 1st quote! Sorry!

Again if you look at Iran's Navy as a tool to be used in case of a U.S. attack then YES! Against the U.S. in the 1st day blitz attack 80-90% of Iran's Blue Water Navy + 70% of Iranian FAC over 120ft long will be destroyed in the 1st day so the more ships you have the more of them are likely to survive

And 300 ft long with a 10ft draought isn't really that big and even at 300ft the mowj class gets thrown side to side violently when their at high seas and comparatively the ship's draought is 3 times smaller than the Ticonderoga Class & Virginia class cruisers draft so they really aren't that big!
So why build them? Again your looking at Iran's Navy as a tool to be used in a war against the U.S. as if they don't conduct any other missions or have any other use!

I would directly contribute the growth of Iran's Civilian Naval industry to Iran's Navy because without the Navy Iran wouldn't have enough properly trained personal to expand on that industry domestically and that is far more valuable than a few ships to be used to fend off a war against the U.S. if and when there is one!

Ghatreh Ghatreh jam gardad vangani darya shaved! And Iran's Navy truly knows the value of that and until they build a good size fleet they will likely allocate their resources as such that allows them to do that with the limited funding that they have!

And once they have the fleet that they want & the country takes the civilian naval industry to the level that they want then and only then can they start discussions about reallocating resources towards fuel, manpower & increased number of weapons on each platform rather than R&D & continued expansion of facilities, tools & platforms

I personally would like to see their FAC to be redesigned so they could potentially carry more missiles & more fuel because more of them are more likely survive an initial US strike

And firing those missiles at high seas when the ship is being rocked left and right is NOT possible and at the end of the day your vessel needs enough stability, protection & countermeasures for the benefits to out way the cost of house a large stock of missiles and the Mowj class is just too small

And the notion that they can build as many missiles as they want is just NOT true! And it's not about the financial cost of each missile rather than the production capacity of it's components

Right now they need to build Turbojet engines for
Ghadir Antiship cruise missile & Nasir (not to be confused with Nasr) Ground, ship & air launched
Ya Ali Cruise Missile, Soumar, Karrar, Simorgh & various other UAV's that require jet engines
Air Force also has PGM that require jet engines like the Qassed-3
And various Aircraft in Iran operate off Iranian built Jet engines & or none Iranian engines that require a constant supply of Iranian jet engine parts

And the fact is Iran didn't increase Jet Engine production as fast and as much as they increased platforms that require them and it doesn't matter how much the engines cost because you are limited by the number of tools, facilities & manpower to produce them

For example if your max capacity without a major investment in tools & facilities was 300 toloue engines per year & before you were producing 200 for 2 platforms today your producing 300 for 10 different platforms that's only 30 a year for each platform being distributed to various branches of the military (this is just a example)

So it has nothing to do with the cost of the engine it's self or the tech to build them & because these companies aren't privet companies hell bent on increasing sales & production to make more money, the growth of these facilities are restricted to direct government & MOD funding

And it's not just about the engine the same argument holds on various components that are used on all of them from sensors, avionics, INS,....

 

[ilia]

Shiraz

Sahand in the back

What is this ?

 

[sahureka2]

FAC Sina class

 

[Stryker1982]

Right now they need to build Turbojet engines for
Ghadir Antiship cruise missile & Nasir (not to be confused with Nasr) Ground, ship & air launched
Ya Ali Cruise Missile, Soumar, Karrar, Simorgh & various other UAV's that require jet engines
Air Force also has PGM that require jet engines like the Qassed-3
And various Aircraft in Iran operate off Iranian built Jet engines & or none Iranian engines that require a constant supply of Iranian jet engine parts

A

Im curious as to how air launched cruise missile like Ya Ali Or soumar can work. Assuming 700 km for Ya ali, How does say an F-4/5 be able to fire ya ali 700 km away to coastal targets in Saudi Arabia, like Oil facilities without any kind of GPS navigation. Its clearly way to far for it to be marked via lazer or anything.

 

[Fafnir]

Im curious as to how air launched cruise missile like Ya Ali Or soumar can work. Assuming 700 km for Ya ali, How does say an F-4/5 be able to fire ya ali 700 km away to coastal targets in Saudi Arabia, like Oil facilities without any kind of GPS navigation. Its clearly way to far for it to be marked via lazer or anything.

It would use inertial navigation probably using irans local positioning system for its initial position fix and likely backed up by something like tercom with perhaps optical or radar dsmac for final target acquisition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM

 

[VEVAK]

Im curious as to how air launched cruise missile like Ya Ali Or soumar can work. Assuming 700 km for Ya ali, How does say an F-4/5 be able to fire ya ali 700 km away to coastal targets in Saudi Arabia, like Oil facilities without any kind of GPS navigation. Its clearly way to far for it to be marked via lazer or anything.

Imagine a flight simulator installed on your missile that's basically what your INS does your INS using simple flight data with correct speed, heading,.... can Preprogram a route into your missile & using that data you direct your missile to the target + using terrain or image counter mapping using the shape and size of facilities, structures roads & terrain you can correct heading during turns and do terminal guidance

It's a lot more accurate than ballistic projectile & it's a lot simpler & cheaper to get precision guidance with them! But they are also a lot easier to take out

advancements in processing, memory & imaging software technology allows you to do this!

Also, there is NOTHING special about GPS if you know the tech behind it! and over it's own territory a country like Iran can get precision guidance using already installed cellphone towers by simply pinging a receiver from various towers and this allows you to increase the accuracy of your INS using simple avionics data like speed, heading, altitude,..... It's just a matter of collecting enough data of how your platform performs on various preprogramed turn maneuvers at different angles, altitudes,.... And if you gather enough data you can predict how a platform will perform and you can create a software & INS based on that! + counter mapping & imaging software that can correct any imperfections on your INS during flight using fixed known sites & coordinates + they can accurately detect the facility & building your targeting and direct the missile to them


If you can build a flight simulator then you can easily build a fairly accurate INS and you use counter mapping to correct any flaws during turns & terminal guidance

So you see there is NO reason why they would even need a GPS or LPS on them at all!

2ndly the Ya Ali cruise missile belongs to the IRGC and I don't believe the Airframe was built to be launched from fighters but with little adjustment they could make it so they can be launched from F-4's, Su-24 or F-14's but F-5's are doubtful you can't even install a Qassed bomb on the F-5
You'd likely need a fighter with very accurate INS system of it's own that would fire the missile over the Persian Gulf at a predetermined location, altitude & heading

despite what people say this is a very simple thing for a country like Iran the main problem with cruise missiles for a country like Iran is being able to map a countries Air Defenses with up to date info so you know exactly what route to take and to fly at what altitude at what time so your missile doesn't fly right over an AAA or a cheap short ranged SAM system

So simply directing a missile to specific coordinates for known fixed sites is the easy part! Doing it without being detected or intercepted is the real challenge for Iran! Which means Iran would still need Ballistic Missiles as their main weapon for deterrence & Iranian cruise missiles no matter how accurate will NEVER change that!

 

[Fennec fox]

Imagine a flight simulator installed on your missile that's basically what your INS does your INS using simple flight data with correct speed, heading,.... can Preprogram a route into your missile & using that data you direct your missile to the target + using terrain or image counter mapping using the shape and size of facilities, structures roads & terrain you can correct heading during turns and do terminal guidance

It's a lot more accurate than ballistic projectile & it's a lot simpler & cheaper to get precision guidance with them! But they are also a lot easier to take out

advancements in processing, memory & imaging software technology allows you to do this!

Also, there is NOTHING special about GPS if you know the tech behind it! and over it's own territory a country like Iran can get precision guidance using already installed cellphone towers by simply pinging a receiver from various towers and this allows you to increase the accuracy of your INS using simple avionics data like speed, heading, altitude,..... It's just a matter of collecting enough data of how your platform performs on various preprogramed turn maneuvers at different angles, altitudes,.... And if you gather enough data you can predict how a platform will perform and you can create a software & INS based on that! + counter mapping & imaging software that can correct any imperfections on your INS during flight using fixed known sites & coordinates + they can accurately detect the facility & building your targeting and direct the missile to them


If you can build a flight simulator then you can easily build a fairly accurate INS and you use counter mapping to correct any flaws during turns & terminal guidance

So you see there is NO reason why they would even need a GPS or LPS on them at all!

2ndly the Ya Ali cruise missile belongs to the IRGC and I don't believe the Airframe was built to be launched from fighters but with little adjustment they could make it so they can be launched from F-4's, Su-24 or F-14's but F-5's are doubtful you can't even install a Qassed bomb on the F-5
You'd likely need a fighter with very accurate INS system of it's own that would fire the missile over the Persian Gulf at a predetermined location, altitude & heading

despite what people say this is a very simple thing for a country like Iran the main problem with cruise missiles for a country like Iran is being able to map a countries Air Defenses with up to date info so you know exactly what route to take and to fly at what altitude at what time so your missile doesn't fly right over an AAA or a cheap short ranged SAM system

So simply directing a missile to specific coordinates for known fixed sites is the easy part! Doing it without being detected or intercepted is the real challenge for Iran! Which means Iran would still need Ballistic Missiles as their main weapon for deterrence & Iranian cruise missiles no matter how accurate will NEVER change that!

And how are you planning to acquire the data sets/data for terrain mapping?

 

[arashkamangir]

And how are you planning to acquire the data sets/data for terrain mapping?

Google.

 

[Fennec fox]

Google.

Good luck with finding military grade mapping datasets.