Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 12/05/2007 View Tue 12/04/2007 View Mon 12/03/2007 View Sun 12/02/2007 View Sat 12/01/2007 View Fri 11/30/2007 View Thu 11/29/2007
1
2007-12-05 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
The Iranian Little (Submarine) Wonder
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 ed 2007-12-05 08:54|| || Front Page|| [4 views ]  Top

#1 The Strategy Page article seems to confirm that the 'Gaydar' is based on the Italian/Paki design.
Posted by Pappy 2007-12-05 09:12||   2007-12-05 09:12|| Front Page Top

#2 The Yoko Ono-class.
Posted by Anonymoose 2007-12-05 09:30||   2007-12-05 09:30|| Front Page Top

#3 The MG110s [the Italian design the Iranians copied] are 85 feet long, displace 105 tons and have a crew of six. These boats are designed to also carry eight combat scuba divers. These subs can carry two torpedoes or mines externally. Top speed on the surface (using the diesel engine) is 16 kilometers an hour. The sub can stay at sea for about five days.

I suppose it would be useful for interdicting the Straits of Hormuz, but not much beyond that. No reloads, and I'll bet that habitability becomes an issue pretty quick in a boat that small.
Posted by Mike 2007-12-05 10:21||   2007-12-05 10:21|| Front Page Top

#4 OK, who gets to explain to them what "gaydar" means?
Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford  2007-12-05 11:09|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2007-12-05 11:09|| Front Page Top

#5 "Italian/Paki design" -- there have got to be some jokes in there somewhere.
Posted by Darrell 2007-12-05 11:28||   2007-12-05 11:28|| Front Page Top

#6 OK, who gets to explain to them what "gaydar" means?

Shielded against a gay bomb, but vulnerable to a no-dong assault.

Anyone else think that getting a crew together from 'Deadliest Catch' with some fancy fishing trowels (skiff extensions with magnetic decoys) would take care of this?
Posted by swksvolFF 2007-12-05 11:43||   2007-12-05 11:43|| Front Page Top

#7 top speed of 16 kph. That's the equivalent of 8.5 knots. Shouldn't most ships just be able to out-run this guy?

Al
Posted by Frozen Al">Frozen Al  2007-12-05 11:46||   2007-12-05 11:46|| Front Page Top

#8 You'd think so but it's a sub and the watchword is ambush.
Posted by Icerigger">Icerigger  2007-12-05 12:10||   2007-12-05 12:10|| Front Page Top

#9 Anyone else think that getting a crew together from 'Deadliest Catch' with some fancy fishing trowels (skiff extensions with magnetic decoys) would take care of this?

I'd put money on the cast of "Kid Nation" before I'd bet on an Iranian sub.
Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford  2007-12-05 12:13|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2007-12-05 12:13|| Front Page Top

#10 I suppose it would be useful for interdicting the Straits of Hormuz, but not much beyond that. No reloads, and I'll bet that habitability becomes an issue pretty quick in a boat that small.

The hypothesis is that the subs will be supported from oil platforms. The limited range is a given. From what I gather, the original intent was to transport commandos/special ops troops. Likely it's part of the much-touted 'Iranian response' against the other Gulf states should war break out.

[btw, the 'Gaydar' is an inside joke in the armchair-admiral community (the actual name is 'Ghadir').]
Posted by Pappy 2007-12-05 12:16||   2007-12-05 12:16|| Front Page Top

#11 I'd laugh at this thing, but the US's last attempt at building a swimmer delivery vehicle was cancelled due to drastic cost overruns and whatever other reasons they weren't telling us about.

Maybe I should be laughing at the US, or maybe I should just be crying.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-12-05 12:24||   2007-12-05 12:24|| Front Page Top

#12 Snowy here,
Posted by Thomas Woof 2007-12-05 14:30||   2007-12-05 14:30|| Front Page Top

#13 Thomas Woof:

See here: link.
In the end, however, technical, reliability, and cost issues have proven nearly insuperable. Indeed, the ASDS has been cancelled for all intents and purposes; all that's left is an ASDS-1 improvement program to boost the performance of the existing sub and complete its operational testing. The Richmond Times-Dispatch notes that the ASDS mini-subs were originally supposed to cost $80 million each, but numerous problems with the first boat have ballooned its cost to $446 million so far (vendor and government facility costs inclusive). Instead of completing integration and entering service in 2000, testing continued and the first boat was officially delivered in July 2003. GlobalSecurity adds that the program was initially projected to cost $527 million (including delivery of all six boats), but it is now predicted to rise to more than $2 billion – significantly more than the $1.4 billion SSGN Tactical Trident conversion program to which it is related.
Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-12-05 14:36||   2007-12-05 14:36|| Front Page Top

#14 Yow!
Posted by Thomas Woof 2007-12-05 14:40||   2007-12-05 14:40|| Front Page Top

23:56 JosephMendiola
23:46 JosephMendiola
22:21 Old Patriot
22:20 mrp
22:16 Mike N.
22:11 Barbara Skolaut
22:09 Barbara Skolaut
22:09 Alaska Paul
22:07 Alaska Paul
21:37 Alaska Paul
21:35 Alaska Paul
21:35 mrp
21:33 Alaska Paul
21:30 Geoffro
21:29 Mike
21:23 Procopius2k
21:22 Barbara Skolaut
21:18 DMFD
20:56 Barbara Skolaut
20:47 Barbara Skolaut
20:45 DoDo
20:43 J. Thaddeus Toad
20:38 ryuge
20:37 Eric Jablow









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com