| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iran 'fires underwater missile' |
| 2006-04-02 |
| IRAN said it had test-fired what it described as the world's fastest underwater missile during a week of war games in the Gulf, Iranian state television reported. "The world's fastest underwater missile was successfully test fired on the third day of the Holy Prophet war games," state television reported in a caption without giving a source or details. Western nations have been watching developments in Iran's missile capabilities with concern amid a stand-off over the Iranian nuclear program, which the west says is aimed at building atomic bombs. Iran says the program is civilian. Iran's armed forces said last week they had successfully test fired a domestically produced missile from land which could evade radar. Iranian state television had said that missile was called Fajr-3. But Hossein Salami, head of the Revolutionary Guards air force, did not name the new weapon or give the missile's range, saying it depended on the warhead weight. He told state television it was a defensive weapon. The US-based military affairs website globalsecurity.org describes the Fajr-3 as a 240mm artillery rocket with a 40km range, one of a group of light rockets Iran has developed mainly for tactical use on the battlefield. However, it also says Iran has been working on another missile, called the Kosar, that would be undetectable by radar and designed to sink ships in the Gulf. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #47 PLEASE PEOPLE, Keep it simple. Let's vaporize them. No BS. No threats. No ridiculous sanctions. Nighty-night, assholes. |
| Posted by: Asymmetrical Triangulation 2006-04-02 21:34 |
| #46 Frank, it doesn't take top-of-class to make pirate copies. Bottom of class and some good machinists will do just fine. I say glass 'em before they get lucky. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-04-02 20:41 |
| #45 So 40 or 50 cruise missiles get "lost" and take out Moscow. Oops and, BTW, fuck you Putin. |
| Posted by: Phosh Uneath3161 2006-04-02 20:20 |
| #44 Technological expertise is highly fungible. There is a vast worldwide network of specialized, in-depth experts, some with good some with bad motives. We solved a leaky mechanical heart value by tapping into the expertise of an in-depth knowledge of submarine technology and sealants. My own suspicion is that Iran is a proxy for Russia much as we used proxies in Afganistan. Russia has transferred the underwater missile technology to Iran and has helped them acquire the underlying expertise. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-02 20:17 |
| #43 Darrell - I also had multi- Iranian co-students. How many of them were serious, or the best of class-types? They were just as bell-curved as anyone, and the one's that were top of class, stayed to make money |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-02 19:39 |
| #42 Supercavitatinn Torpedoe Supercavitation: Undersea and in space Scientists at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center in Newport, Rhode Island demonstrated in 1997, a fully submerged launch of a supercavitating projectile (with air injected in its nose) with a muzzle velocity of 5,082 feet (1,549 meters) per second, making it the first underwater weapon to break the sound barrier |
| Posted by: RD 2006-04-02 19:00 |
| #41 Perhaps I did. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-02 18:38 |
| #40 Umm, Captain A. I think you missed Sea's ironic tone. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-04-02 18:25 |
| #39 This is more about Russia than Iran. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-02 18:25 |
| #38 Generalismo Holstein Salami, father of Iranian assymetric warfare, is just hot dogging it on TV. holy profit war games, indeed... |
| Posted by: Inspector Clueso 2006-04-02 18:23 |
| #37 Sea - my comment was tongue in (mouth)cheek, your response has your tongue between the wrong cheeks. I don't take orders on clean and pressed from lower beings. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-02 18:20 |
| #36 the Holy Prophet war games This says everything you need to know about Iran. |
| Posted by: Spot 2006-04-02 17:47 |
| #35 Can I quote George Bush? "Bring it on." |
| Posted by: Mark E. 2006-04-02 17:42 |
| #34 Not sayin' it ain't BS, but be careful about those "advanced Muslim technology" jokes. They've got the money to buy plans and the insanity to use them. Half of my fellow graduate students in mechanical enginering in 1978-79 were Iranians. There were plenty over in electrical engineering too. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-04-02 17:30 |
| #33 The problem with cavitating torpedoes is that they are blind straight shot weapons like those old WW1 torpedoes point and shoot with either a timer or impact fuse. The cavitation bubble cancels out any sensors for guidance. That was the catch with this weapon. A US super carrier will suck up multiple direct hits by the biggest torpedoes and I think the Russians and Chicoms were thinking nuke warheads were direct hits were unnecessary. Even if IranÂ’s got some primitive nukes they are not small enough or even if so numerous enough to risk putting in a torpedo that will be one of many on small attack boats that the majority of will be sunk before they even make deep water. Another major problem is even assuming they have copied the tech and assuming they have deployed it in numbers wont get anywhere near a carrier. Our escorts will be on full patrol and those few loud Iranian subs are doomed if they donÂ’t have a sea Wolf tracking em as we speak waiting on the code. I would imagine the Persian Gulf would be a massive no goes zone for anything short approved tankers and Coalition warships. People donÂ’t understand what an effective if allowed area denial weapon our sea/air power is, expect that area to be the Persian Gulf in its entirety fisherman be dammed. This is the big show boy. That is what has pissed me off so badly about the Iraq phase of the WOT. Bush not being able to rally and keep the people rallied means the LLLÂ’s have succeeded in setting the standard so high that even Iraq an incredible victory on all fronts by historical comparison is allowed to be played as a defeat. Now with the big show looming the consequences of this failure will be seen full well as real casualties and losses of equipment and WAR cost start rolling in. When we lose a couple of ships and double digits of air craft on the first few days with more dead than the entire Iraq phase without even going into the land phase the screams from the LLLÂ’s will be deafening. |
| Posted by: C-Low 2006-04-02 17:22 |
| #32 Shep, you keep watching it, they'll keep running it. That's why the MSM is to be generally disbelieved, expecially when they're pimping for their Koranic Masters. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-04-02 16:51 |
| #31 Koranic Kavitaters[™] too is a new instant classic. Toss back a black and tan for me, Shep, and we'll call it even, emkay? Glad to give y'all a giggle across the pond. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-04-02 16:50 |
| #30 Video of the Iranians firing the Shkval Link to video |
| Posted by: john 2006-04-02 16:46 |
| #29 Bottom line is that Iran has several defensive capabilities we supressed or denied to Saddam during the "no fly" era: 1. Sunburn 2. Diesel Electric subs with Skval 3. SA300 missiles on order as part of an already integrated air defense system 4. A real, albeit somewhat antiquated airforce based so as to defend the nuke sites 5. Well engineered underground facilities 6. Theater ballistic missiles with supposedly effective guidance systems Like Iraq, Iran has had a lot of Russian and Chinese help. I'm not saying they're invincible, but I assume the Navy and Air Force are taking them seriously. I would assume they learned something when we sunk their last Navy. I'm afraid the window for peaceful regime change is closed. The best thing we have going for us is that Ahmadinejad seems like he wants to start something a little too soon. |
| Posted by: JAB 2006-04-02 16:44 |
| #28 Shep - I figure some sort of Dar al Doomsday thing will have to come next. Y'know, the one that would issue launch orders to the melted C&C circuitry. |
| Posted by: Jaitle Thrineger2931 2006-04-02 16:40 |
| #27 Sky seem to be all ecited about this torpedo - serious faces all round in the news room as they struggle to tell us about it. running the report about every 30mins too. Hey another thought, what if they used it as there new wonder weapon in any 'Tanker wars' they might have planned - now surly one of these big sea slugs could smash right through a tanker or break its back clean in two if detonated under it! be a few bucks worth of crude down the drain not to mention a big old mess of the eco system and ducks and stuff. Kinda like when Sammy lit all the oil wells then opened others up to drain into the sea - which is a point if anyone else did that you'd never have heard the last of it but when does anyone ever mention Sammy fcking up a whole Eco system like that back in 1991 and why the hell isnt that act alone enough to convince the lefties out there just what a tosser he was and how much he needed taking out of power for the whole regions sake. sorry for going off topic there. |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 16:40 |
| #26 What beach? Heh. |
| Posted by: Jaitle Thrineger2931 2006-04-02 16:37 |
| #25 ...Guess the US Nay will have to immediately destroy any Iranian ship, patrol boat or dhow that approaches within 10 miles... Hit the nail right on the head 'ed', The US will only need to turn the 'dome' into a 'bubble'! Assign a jdam to anything larger than a canoe at 20 minutes out! Better yet, shut them down at the beach! |
| Posted by: smn 2006-04-02 16:35 |
| #24 rofl, the Koranimals at the gates of Dhimmi, cape being handed over pressed clean - that had me fckin laughing so much, Koranic Kavitaters too is a new instant classic. The Koranic Catipiler Drive is next :) Koranic egg thrower lol, sorry i've got the giggles bad now after reading those last few posts. Been a good thread this for sure. Wonder what suprises Mad Mullah Industries has install next? |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 16:34 |
| #23 If there's no one alive to issue the orders for launching these Koranic Kavitaters™, then they're not much of a threat, are they? Decap. Just sayin'. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-04-02 16:27 |
| #22 Yes, Captain America, please report to the Dhimmi Gate. And have your cape pressed and cleaned when you hand it over, you won't be needing it any more. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-04-02 16:11 |
| #21 Damn there good, everything is the world's best. Only the best for the holy profit war games. Should we fold now? |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-02 16:04 |
| #20 I guess we're double-extra-super doomed, now, huh? If the inventory stocks suffice for our most indiscriminate war plan, well gosh, let's go ahead and get it on to make sure it's double-extra-super painful for em. |
| Posted by: Jaitle Thrineger2931 2006-04-02 16:03 |
| #19 Interesting Shep. Any word if the Iranians are claiming it is domestically produced? The original Skval was solid fueled and stable. The "improved" Skval that sank the Kursk used a combined liquid fuel and oxidizer (highly unstable). There is no hint that the Chinese and Iranians decided to buy into that "improvement". Guess the US Nay will have to immediately destroy any Iranian ship, patrol boat or dhow that approaches within 10 miles. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-04-02 15:49 |
| #18 If the Iranians test fired a Shkval, the US Navy would know it. No way to hide that acoustic signature. FWIW: UPI Hears No details were given of the torpedo production, but Western analysts nervously note that Iran is known to have acquired a number of Russian VA-111 supercavitating Shkval torpedoes, specifically designed to destroy aircraft carriers, and are worried that the Iranians now might be producing their own indigenous version. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-04-02 15:39 |
| #17 good piont about coastal launches there - very hard to spot that sort of thing i'd imagine even with modern technolagy, what about even launching from civilian type vessels? i wouldnt put anything past the Iranians. Also after a bit of 'swatting up' on this old subject of rocket torps it would seem that later versions are somewhat guideable too and not just a point and shoot weapon, not sure how its guided, perhaps a wire guide using copper or fibre optic wiring or is it recieving signals from the firing boat or another set of eyes. Its short range too is also not a factor with later models which are said to be able to slow down to aquire the target which also implies using less fuel (ok not defenatly) and the torps may actually have thier own guidence system. Solid fuel rockets cannot be shut off and restarted right? but can liquid fueled rockets be throttled? i'd have thought they could but once again my knowladge is almost non-existenet on that subject. Ah armchair intel anyalists,lol, what would the world be like without us hehe. I'm wondering whats gonna come next from Iran - maybe some other exciting (and higly dangerous) weapons system. What 'card' are they gonna get next to add to thier collection and when will the big game begin??? |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 15:37 |
| #16 In this odd case, we should also consider the launching of torpedoes from coastal docks or small boats. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-04-02 14:52 |
| #15 Sky news just ran some footage of the Shkval being tested by Iran, looks like its real alright. |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 14:43 |
| #14 Yeah, right. Advanced muslim technology. Uh-huh. Camel saddles to underwater missiles. Riiiiiiight. I guess the Russians sold their (outmoded) stocks of this, ah-hem, weapon. |
| Posted by: Brett 2006-04-02 14:42 |
| #13 However, it also says Iran has been working on another missile, called the Kosar, that would be undetectable by radar and designed to sink ships in the Gulf Should be easy to intercept, low mobility, and susceptible to joint failure |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-02 14:34 |
| #12 sure they INTENDED it to be an underwater missile? LOL |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-02 14:29 |
| #11 Meanwhile, Iran was forced to deny a German (der Bund) report of huge gold transfers from Swiss reserves. Would anyone be asking for gold, to cover weapon transfers? http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_14550.shtml |
| Posted by: Listen to Dogs 2006-04-02 14:02 |
| #10 just a quicky, yes unfortuantly it does fire from the standard size torp tubes so Iranian Kilo class subs could operate this weapon if they needed and wanted to. Oh not such a quicky i guess but wouldnt it be a real victory for Iran to put a couple of these into a US super carrier and watch it sink, 4000 odd people would be dead, billions of aircraft and the ship sunk - the ultimate propaganda but the worst bit is they could do it without using any nuclear weapons therefore keeping the confict conventional and not having there cities turned to glass. Basically they can now create as much upset without nukes as with nukes if this is true, to me its a like someone just handed Iran a new 'card to play' - who handed them the card - China i reackon |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 13:57 |
| #9 don't be so sure they don't have the Shkval, reports for a long time now in military circles and publications have been claiming chinese involvment with this carrier killing underwater rocket, but i do remember a few months maybe a year back DARPA said it had invented a system of 'acoustic defensives' for subs that would pre detonate an incoming torpedo warhead by slamming sound waves into it (i think i'm no tech guy though don't even have GCSE's lol). Im not sure how they would launch such a torp but i've a horrible feeling the Shkval can fit in standard russian torpedo tubes. Oh and i also think that a Shkval test caused the kursk to go boom but thats a nother argument alltogether i guess. I would also add that had they been firing these underwater super torps then anywhere in the gulf area im sure some other nations military would be watching the Iranians everymove and should already have a good idea from what vessel it was launched/fired from. Again though this is interesting stuff, i was only a child during the coldwar and only saw the 80's part of the cold war myself but to me this is like a wannabe cold war at the moment, wannabe because the Iranians simply don't have the bucks and materials and knowladge like the Reds did but to keep up. Of course all this modern day talk of miltarys need ing to be able to fight only terrorists is edging us futher and futher from the reality of real military threats such as China and Iran (if it dosnt get kicked in within a decade or so). To me thats what i find the scary part and i sure hope im wrong but its very bad if we lose track of the big picture as it were. Oh well theres another rambling post for all to absorb, till next time. |
| Posted by: ShepUK 2006-04-02 13:51 |
| #8 glass |
| Posted by: 3dc 2006-04-02 13:30 |
| #7 Mike, I hope you're right. The alternative is worrysome. They would have quite the dominating card over ports that we use on the other side. I hope we're checking this activity out, and nipping it in the bud. |
| Posted by: Jan 2006-04-02 13:16 |
| #6 They are clearly claiming they have Shkval. The other article quotest it has the exact same top speed. It could be bs, but they would be smart to develop this capability. Can a Kilo handle a Shkval in its tubes or does it need modification? |
| Posted by: JAB 2006-04-02 12:55 |
| #5 Underwater missiles - don't we call those things torpedoes? cavitating Persian cucumbers |
| Posted by: RD 2006-04-02 12:47 |
| #4 Last time I checked, the only ship that was probably sunk by the Skval was the Kursk. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-04-02 12:41 |
| #3 Underwater missiles - don't we call those things torpedoes? |
| Posted by: Raj 2006-04-02 12:29 |
| #2 I call BS on this one. They ain't got Shkval or anything even close to it, if for no other reason than the Russians know what would happen if we lost a carrier. And that radar evading missile? Ain't happening either, not as long as all of their missiles are still merely linear descendants of the V2. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2006-04-02 12:26 |
| #1 They are one day late for April Fool's Day |
| Posted by: Penguin 2006-04-02 12:03 |