What’s Wrong With Iran’s Fake Aircraft Carrier

[Hack-Hook]

US Lexington class carrier was able to carry 90 aircraft, 4*200mm cannons and 12*127mm cannons. this things weight ~350 tons overall.
each oto melara-76mm multi purpose weights ~7.5 tons empty. each kamand/ak-630 point defense weights 1 ton empty. two 76mm+six 30mm cannons=21 tons empty.
240*6.296 kg (76mm ordinary ammunition weight)=1.5 tons==>1.5*2=3 tons
4000*853g (30*165mm ammunition weight)=~3.5 tons==>3.5*6=21 tons
overall weapons and ammunition weight=21+21+3=45 tons
each sayyad-2 missile alongside with it's canister weights 1.8 tons. considering this with a wild guess, sayyad 4 would weight around 6 tons with it's canister.
20*SD-4=120 tons
each hawk/shaheen missile weight 590 kg (shalamcheh-2 looks lighter but anyway we consider worst case scenario). if we consider the same canister weight to missile weight of sayyad-2 for shalamcheh-2, meaning 0.8 missile weight:
590 kg*40=23.6 tons==>23.6*1.8=42.5 tons.
overall air defenses weight=120+42.5=162.5 tons

350-207.5=142.5 tons weight saved for aerial vehicles and cruise missiles
each mil mi-17 has 13 tons max take off weight:
5*13=65 tons
each ah-1j has 4.5 max take off weight:
4.5*6=27 tons.
overall helicopters weight:
65+27=92 tons

162.5-92=70.5 tons weight saved for cruise missiles and drones

considering that the shahed s-191 uses tj-100 engine, and the fact that another small homemade airplane uses the same engine and it's range is similar and it weights around 600 kg, i assume each s-191 drone weights the same. so for 50 s-191 drones we will spare 30 tons.
considering the thrust/weight ratio of kh-55 missile and using tj-100 thrust (which we use it in ya ali cruise missile), each ya ali missile will weight around 600 kg. with 40.5 tons remaining after adding drones we can have around 70 ya ali missiles onboard of our aircraft cruiser. or 27 soumar cruise missiles.

so lets review our new aircraft carrier/aircraft cruiser capabilities:

-two oto melara-76/fajr-27 with 240 round per cannon
-six ak-630/kamand CIWS with 4000 rounds per cannon
-20 sayyad-4 long range missiles
-40 shalamcheh-2 short range missiles
-5 mil mi-17 medium transport helicopters
-6 ah-1j attack helicopters
-50 stealth s-191 drones
-70 ya ali or 27 soumar/kh-55 cruise missile

consider this fact that lexington used 16 water boilers to power it's propulsion, while we can use two or three of our f-4s engines with free running turbine in tandem to make more power compared to Lexington. it translates into lighter weights.

Lexington class carrier:

you are welcome to it , this was all it take to sank lexinton

and it was a 37000 ton ship

I already explained the MaRV in missiles like K-1/2 can do what you just said. Course correction is possible. The missiles do not need to "lock" on anything. Certain guidance systems can utilise locking mechanism, i.e thermal, but that is not a necessity.

no it can't , its maneuverable enough for stationary target but not enough for a moving target , it move a lot faster than the warhead of Persian Gulf (almost 5 time) so you have a lot less time to make course correction and that means a lot more stress on the already stressed out warhead. and no thermal at least ours cant lock at those speeds . if they could we already would have put them there

 

[Philosopher]

no it can't , its maneuverable enough for stationary target but not enough for a moving target , it move a lot faster than the warhead of Persian Gulf (almost 5 time) so you have a lot less time to make course correction and that means a lot more stress on the already stressed out warhead. and no thermal at least ours cant lock at those speeds . if they could we already would have put them there

Ships do not travel at supersonic speeds, the level of course correction needed is well within the capability of Iran and there is not reason to think the K-1/2 cannot perform a maneuver. Most of these missiles perform maneuvers anyway (for AD defence defeating purposes). Furthermore, like I said, a cluster warhead remove the need for course correction to a great extent given the area of effects of the bomblets. As for the thermal camera comment, I am talking generally and the point was not all guidance systems require a lock on mechanism.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Ships do not travel at supersonic speeds, the level of course correction needed is well within the capability of Iran and there is not reason to think the K-1/2 cannot perform a maneuver. Most of these missiles perform maneuvers anyway (for AD defence defeating purposes). Furthermore, like I said, a cluster warhead remove the need for course correction to a great extent given the area of effects of the bomblets. As for the thermal camera comment, I am talking generally and the point was not all guidance systems require a lock on mechanism.

well if you want to disable a warship with cluster warhead you are welcome to try it and tell me why we are using slower quasi balistic missile as antiship weapon when according to you we can use a lot fadter balistic missiles. and let not talk about lock on target , have you ever tried to move a thermal camera fater than what it designed for and see what will happen ?

 

[Philosopher]

well if you want to disable a warship with cluster warhead you are welcome to try it

Lets forget the fact this strategy was noted by IRGC itself( go read what General Safavi himself said) it does not take much understanding to realise bomblets traveling at supersonic/hypersonic speeds will wreck the surface of any vessel out there. Unless your definition of disabling a ship is sinking it, then this is more than sufficient.

and tell me why we are using slower quasi balistic missile as antiship weapon when according to you we can use a lot fadter balistic missiles.

It's called development, nations start of with simpler technologies and work their way up. Khalije Fars missile was made well over a decade ago. Also, yes, these so called "quasi-ballistics" do have their own advantages in terms of intra-atmosphere maneuverability, but this does not mean a classic ballistic systems is not developed as well.

 

[Mithridates]

you are welcome to it , this was all it take to sank lexinton

and it was a 37000 ton ship

It was just an example.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Lets forget the fact this strategy was noted by IRGC itself( go read what General Safavi himself said) it does not take much understanding to realise bomblets traveling at supersonic/hypersonic speeds will wreck the surface of any vessel out there. Unless your definition of disabling a ship is sinking it, then this is more than sufficient.

in wartime many things are considered operable that at peace time we send them ASAP to drydock

 

[Philosopher]

in wartime many things are considered operable that at peace time we send them ASAP to drydock

Except we are talking about well known concepts, i.e using missiles. We are not considering some bleeding edge technology in the military field.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Except we are talking about well known concepts, i.e using missiles. We are not considering some bleeding edge technology in the military field.

we are talking a bout ships , you hit a warship with a cluster war head with 750 bomblet , and 20 or less of them hit it the rest will hit the sea . what you think will happen

 

[Philosopher]

we are talking a bout ships , you hit a warship with a cluster war head with 750 bomblet , and 20 or less of them hit it the rest will hit the sea . what you think will happen

750 bomblets is a false number. Actual number is more than twice that for even a Ghadr like missiles, never-mind Khormashahr-1 with its 1800kg warhead. Anyway, even considering your own scenario, 20 bomblets traveling at hypersonic speeds hitting the surface of ships will cause a serious amount of damage and take that ship out of service. This is a very straightforward concept, I cannot simply it further.

 

[I S I]

Lol

 

[Hack-Hook]

750 bomblets is a false number. Actual number is more than twice that for even a Ghadr like missiles, never-mind Khormashahr-1 with its 1800kg warhead. Anyway, even considering your own scenario, 20 bomblets traveling at hypersonic speeds hitting the surface of ships will cause a serious amount of damage and take that ship out of service. This is common sense, I cannot simply it further.

no the problem is it won't another problem our cluster war head is not a guided warhead or a percise one . it fall in vicinty it may not hit the ship and the packaging of those bomblet are the main weight the explossives are smalls . those bomblets are good against personel not facilities and as i said there is zero evidence that iran plan to use anything but quasi ballistic missile for antiship roles . so goes your hypersonic theory

 

[Philosopher]

no the problem is it won't another problem our cluster war head is not a guided warhead or a percise one .

The clusters themselves do not need to have any guidance. Generally speaking, a cluster warhead can spread them over several Km. Do you not think Iran's current warhead could guide the payload into a more accurate area than that prior to releasing their payload in order to maximise the potential to hit?

it fall in vicinty it may not hit the ship and the packaging of those bomblet are the main weight the explossives are smalls .

The ships will be hit with potentially many of such bomblets traveling at hypersonic speed leading to a great level of damage. This is basic physics, it's odd I even need to re-emphasise this point.

Furthermore, you need to realise that warships themselves are packed with explosives that will lead to chain explosions. Here is an historical example:


"During the Vietnam War, the USS Forrestal was often stationed off the coast of North Vietnam, conducting combat operations. On the morning of July 29, the ship was preparing to attack when a rocket from one of its own F-4 Phantom jet fighters was accidentally launched. The rocket streaked across the deck and hit a parked A-4 Skyhawk jet. The Skyhawk, which was waiting to take off, was piloted by John McCain, the future senator from Arizona.

Fuel from the Skyhawk spilled out and caught fire. The fire then spread to nearby planes on the ship’s deck and detonated a 1,000-pound bomb, which killed many of the initial firefighters and further spread the fire. A chain reaction of explosions blew holes in the flight deck and had half the large ship on fire at one point. Many pilots were trapped in their planes as the fire spread. It took a full day before the fires could be fully contained.

Hundreds of sailors were seriously injured and 134 lost their lives in the devastating fire. Twenty planes were destroyed. It was the worst loss of a life on a U.S. Navy ship since World War II. Temporary repairs were made to the ship in the Philippines before the Forrestal headed back to Norfolk, Virginia. It was repaired and put back into service the following April, but never returned to Vietnam."

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rocket-causes-deadly-fire-on-aircraft-carrier

This incident started due to a relatively small rocket going off accidentally leading to such a chain event. You need to consider many factors, even without these, the damage caused by bomblets is more than sufficient to lead to disabling of the ships.

i said there is zero evidence that iran plan to use anything but quasi ballistic missile for antiship roles . so goes your hypersonic theory

"zero evidence" because you're not doing your search properly. Here is the IRGC general Safavi saying back in 06 about using Shahab type missiles cluster warhead against an aircraft carrier, watch from 4:10.

Furthermore, General Hajizadeh had stated Iran has anti-ship ballistic missiles with 2000km range, apparently you think this missiles will be a "quasi ballistic missile" and not the obvious and common sense thought that it will be a missile in the Sejill, Ghadr or even khoramshahr series.

 

[Hack-Hook]

The clusters themselves do not need to have any guidance. Generally speaking, a cluster warhead can spread them over several Km. Do you not think Iran's current warhead could guide the payload into a more accurate area than that prior to releasing their payload in order to maximise the potential to hit?

iran have several warhead and not all of them are the same.

The ships will be hit with potentially many of such bomblets traveling at hypersonic speed leading to a great level of damage. This is basic physics, it's odd I even need to re-emphasise this point.

Furthermore, you need to realise that warships themselves are packed with explosives that will lead to chain explosions. Here is an historical example:

the bomblets are dispersed at altitude and designed to cover areas not hit a special target . also we dont have a 1800kg cluster warhead , the heaviest cluster warhead that we have is that , 750 bomblet 600kg warhead that we designed for shahab-3

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rocket-causes-deadly-fire-on-aircraft-carrier

This incident started due to a relatively small rocket going off accidentally leading to such a gain event. You need to consider many factors, even without these, the damage caused by bomblets is more than sufficient to lead to disabling of the ships.

old design , that is decomissioned over 20 years ago . the problem with it answered in later designs.

Furthermore, General Hajizadeh had stated Iran has anti-ship ballistic missiles with 2000km range, apparently you think this missiles is a "quasi ballistic missiles" and no the obvious common sense that it will be a missile in the Sejill, Ghadr or even khoramshahr series.

and if you did your research you'd have saw that just last month Adm. Tangsiri said 700 km

 

[Philosopher]

iran have several warhead and not all of them are the same.

This has nothing to do with what I said. I said Iran has the technology to guide the delivery systems to maximise the likelihood of impact.

the bomblets are dispersed at altitude and designed to cover areas not hit a special target .

Clusters warhead are used against un-hardened surfaces. This can include the surface of a naval vessel. Once you cause serious damage there (even without chain explosion) the to extend to take that vessel out of service.

also we dont have a 1800kg cluster warhead , the heaviest cluster warhead that we have is that ,

Where is your proof that Khamshahr does not have a cluster warhead version?

750 bomblet 600kg warhead that we designed for shahab-3

False information, again.

Iranian experts have made some changes to Shahab-3 missiles installing cluster warheads in them with the capacity to carry 1,400 bombs,"

https://web.archive.org/web/2006110...D/meast/11/02/iran.manoeuvres.reut/index.html

old design , that is decomissioned over 20 years ago . the problem with it answered in later designs.

Now that your claim was debunked, you're trying to move the goal post. Shahab-2 is not the only missiles with cluster warhead, ghadr systems etc also use that. The point was to show you Iran does have the use of ballistic missile with cluster warhead in its plan.

i

and if you did your research you'd have saw that just last month Adm. Tangsiri said 700 km

What does that have to do with a ballistic missile? Since when does the IRGC navy use ballistic missiles?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Where is your proof that Khamshahr does not have a cluster warhead version?

where is your proof that it had one