Article

2006-04-03 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2006-04-03 10:43|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Why 'boast'? Sounds like an attempt to deter attack by US. Previous 'signals' from Teheran seemed to actually be daring/inviting US attack. If that was still the case, why advertise your 'new' ability to inflict major damage on your potential foe?
Possibilities:
1) Boast is not true, and is intended to cause US to pursue more difficult attack course.
2) Boast is true, and is indicative of some change in Teheran thinking (if such a word can be used regarding Teheran leadership.) If so, what changed and why?

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2006-04-03 11:03|| 2006-04-03 11:03|| Front Page Top

#2 Internal consumption. Indication of international support. Hope for last minute change in plans making errors more likely. Faith in Allah.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-04-03 11:24|| 2006-04-03 11:24|| Front Page Top

#3 So if the press is reporting this, that means W. can attack anytime, since we know they have them?
After all, the press would'nt decieve us or report anything that is just propaganda.

Posted by plainslow 2006-04-03 12:05|| 2006-04-03 12:05|| Front Page Top

#4 The underwater missile, called the "Hoot,"

It's a Hoot, all right.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2006-04-03 13:14|| 2006-04-03 13:14|| Front Page Top

THIS SHOULD BE THE STANDARD
For all Iranian Rockets

Posted by BigEd 2006-04-03 15:59|| 2006-04-03 15:59|| Front Page Top

#6 What are people's thoughts on how Iran was able to field this weapon? General Fadavi claims that it took 6 years to produce, which suggests that it was acquired after the 1999 IDEX arms exhibition (where it was aggressively marketed by Russian arms dealers), reversed engineered and indigenously produced. But are Iranian engineers capable of reverse-engineering such an advanced weapon?

Posted by GradStudent06">GradStudent06 2006-04-03 16:39|| 2006-04-03 16:39|| Front Page Top

#7 Large grain of salt.

Big freakin' mountain of salt!

Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins 2006-04-03 16:45|| http://blog.simmins.org]">[http://blog.simmins.org] 2006-04-03 16:45|| Front Page Top

#8 But are Iranian engineers capable of reverse-engineering such an advanced weapon?

I say yes. The Skval is essentially a 6000lb unguided solid fueled (tech the Iranians also bought from the neo-Soviets) underwater rocket. While it incorporates some neat hydrodynamic theory, there is little high tech manufacturing in it (i.e. sensors, processors, software). The Iranians are more than capable of copying it after disassembling one of them.

It does allow small massed fast attack craft to launch ship killers, that cannot be spoofed, from outside the range Phalanx and machine guns. Thus requiring the US Navy to attack them farther out with helicopters or ship's cannon, and maybe Sea Sparrows and IR guided RAM missiles.

BTW, an anti-torpedo torpedo. The navy tested one 10 or 15 years ago. I wonder whatever became of it.

Posted by ed 2006-04-03 18:18|| 2006-04-03 18:18|| Front Page Top

#9 From FT.com:

Iranâs war games see oil futures rise by $2 Crude oil prices jumped to their highest level since Hurricane Katrina amid uncertainty about Nigerian supplies and as Iran announced it had tested new weapons during war games in the Strait of Hormuz.

Posted by 3dc 2006-04-03 19:58|| 2006-04-03 19:58|| Front Page Top

#10 An underwater missile that "can outpace an enemy warship." Would that be a ..... torpedo?

Posted by Besoeker 2006-04-03 21:42|| 2006-04-03 21:42|| Front Page Top

#11 an Islamic Torpedo!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-04-03 21:45|| 2006-04-03 21:45|| Front Page Top

#12 No surprise here - just more indicia/evidencia that, within the context of defeating America's future GMD, Russia's alleged "real" anti-GMD superweapon is a long-range, standoff underwater weapon capable of extreme self-defense maneuvers, and remote or independent control, and which can "pop-up" like a SLCM/SUBROC near its target or in final attack phase. Iff we were back in WW2, its predecessor would be the famed, but slow-moving, Japanese "suicide" KAITEN? subs. Traditional Cold War, land-based, ICBM strikes, includ MRV/MIRV-capable, MIGHT NOW be relegated to MOSTLY Second-Strike/Follow-On weapons, with post-Cold War priority now given to TERROR = COMMANDO-SAPPER STRIKES, LR Bomber, and UW-Sub = Arsenal Ship-based land- and naval attack!?

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-04-03 21:46|| 2006-04-03 21:46|| Front Page Top

#13 Ok Iran, so you've got a fast torpedo. We've got Halliburton. Remember Bam do you?

Posted by Besoeker 2006-04-03 21:47|| 2006-04-03 21:47|| Front Page Top

23:35 Listen to Dogs
23:10 Listen to Dogs
23:04 Listen to Dogs
22:55 Listen to Dogs
22:52 Listen to Dogs
22:31 Listen to Dogs
21:41 Listen to Dogs
19:57 Listen to Dogs
19:50 Listen to Dogs
19:35 Listen to Dogs
19:17 Listen to Dogs
18:56 Listen to Dogs
18:49 Listen to Dogs
18:46 Listen to Dogs
05:06 Listen to Dogs
04:42 Listen to Dogs
04:22 Listen to Dogs
03:07 Listen to Dogs
02:52 Listen to Dogs
02:57 Listen to Dogs
02:32 Listen to Dogs
02:27 Listen to Dogs
02:23 Listen to Dogs
01:47 Listen to Dogs