Iran Navy (IRIN): News

@Iranobserver01
The Fateh (Conqueror) Class submarine marks a coming of age Iran’s submarine building program. It is a moderately capable coastal submarine roughly the same size as the Type-206 class. More importantly it clears the way for Iran to build larger submarines.

Spriter
@Spriter99880
·
3h
Iranian Navy to be armed with Abu Mahdi cruise missiles

The United States, Russia and China have anti-ship cruise missiles with a range of more than 1,000 km, and Iran is the fourth country in the world to receive such a missile.

@charly0153
The ship is an improvement over previous Iranian projects although it is missing the SAM component, they say that they will install a multiple VLS for this type of missile in the future, the gap is already planned.

This ship is for blue water , long range in the Ocean . It is overkill in Caspian . Any navy problem in Caspian can be dealt with , by fast attack Boats or landing craft or fighter Jet  or retaliation by BM or Cruise missile or land Army . Too late now !

It all depends on actual or potential threat assessment and efficient use of available resources . The threat is and has been NATO and American attacks from the South of Iran and Persian Gulf region , by their Navy and Air force . Building numerous surface ships , even in the Persian Gulf  for Iran , is in my view a waste of resources . Iran can not match the American 500 ship navy , with a a dozen surface ships , in open water . Iran only needs blue - water ships in northern Indian Ocean , to fight pirates . Although this could be done cheaply with fast attack Boats , still Iran is wealthy enough to save the lives of a few sailors by sailing these larger ships . But Iran is not wealthy enough to engage symmetric gunship battles with the Yanks , 18-th century style ! The best policy is to build submarines for the Ocean , both Diesel and Nuclear and AIP fuel-cell to take out large numbers of American ships and launch cruise missiles near American coast with various warheads . Only for training purposes are these larger Ships useful in Caspian , especially if this use limits  EM radiation leaks and detection of tactics by American underwater listening and spying stations . Think of it as shallow birthing pool , for the baby Sharks . Sure , if Russia has plenty of Ships , why not put one in Caspian . But even this Ship can not do Beach landing of vehicles and troops . Any realistic and conceivable threat in Caspian can be dealt with by cheaper and more available and varied resources , that Iran possesses . Used in more efficient and surgical way . Anti-piracy operation in Caspian is virtually unknown , and needs at most one ship !



https://phys.org/news/2022-06-whale-mothers-nursery-sites-shallow.html

New Iranian frigate Deylaman in the Caspian Sea

On November 27, 2023, at the Bandar Anzali naval base on the coast of Iran on the Caspian Sea, a ceremony was held to commission the light frigate FFGH 78 Deylaman of the Mowj program (Jamaran type), built there at the Shahid Tamjidi Marine shipbuilding enterprise, into the Iranian naval forces in the Caspian Sea. Industries (STMI) of the Marine Industries Organization (MIO), part of the Iranian Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Support. Deylaman became the largest warship of the Iranian Navy in the Caspian Sea.












https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4777335.html

The most surprising is to base it in the Caspian. What's the need there for having such ship in that sea ?

For secret naval exercises with russian ships.

Isos wrote:The most surprising is to base it in the Caspian. What's the need there for having such ship in that sea ?

Look at the composition of the Turkmenistan Navy. Their neighbour right next door.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmen_Naval_Forces

For whatever reason they are massively armed with brand new Turkish made ships including this thing.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/08/turkmenistan-comissions-its-first-turkmen-class-corvette-deniz-han/

This looks particularly excessive especially if you compare their navy with the navies of either Kazakhstan or Azerbaijan.

An old mig-29 or su-25 with kh 25 can destroy any of those ships fairly easily.

Isos wrote:An old mig-29 or su-25 with kh 25 can destroy any of those ships fairly easily.

Not the large ship which I posted a link to. It has the French MICA SAM. Probably has 20 km range.

Isos wrote:An old mig-29 or su-25 with kh 25 can destroy any of those ships fairly easily.

The new Iranian ship will probably still get the Iranian TOR version or (because TOR is reserved for the IRGC) the SM1 rocket like the other ships.

The ship provides a good possibility of mobile radar surveillance in order to better keep an eye on the Israeli friend in the north. It is also necessary to protect the sea route to Russia more massively.

lancelot wrote:

Isos wrote:An old mig-29 or su-25 with kh 25 can destroy any of those ships fairly easily.

Not the large ship which I posted a link to. It has the French MICA SAM. Probably has 20 km range.

20km is the max range. Anti radar kh-25 has 60km range. Laser guided one has 20km range.

Those Mica will be spent on 16 cheap drones. Let alone if they use actual antiship missiles against it. We saw how even the black sea is too small for the russian navy. Caspian sea is even smaller with more dangerous weapons around. Not a place for advanced ships.

Iran doesn't need such ship there.

GarryB wrote:If Armenia is turned west then the west has an opportunity to expand via turkey through Georgia and Armenia and Azerbaijan to the Caspian Sea... where they can interfere with the north south route from Russia down through the Caspian Sea to Iran from China to the Persian Gulf.

It is a safe place to test it anyway, and if everything is OK they can make bigger better vessels for the open ocean.

Armenia stronger is Turkey's problem.

Even if they manage to do it, they won't send Arleigh Burkes to Armenia.

Totally useless place for their newest ship. And it's not like they can have tens of them.

From a technical point of view , I can say that the UCAV tubes placed on thin tripods ! ( on a rolling Sea ) is total no no ! These need to be enclosed totally in tubes , with folding wings , safe from the elements and in large numbers . Similar to missile tubes that are enclosed . The design should allow any type of missiles or drones or torpedo to be built into the Hull of the ship , ready to fire . A swarm of drones or missiles and not just one or two on a Cake stand !






One simple idea is to design the pusher rotors in the rear of the drone , around a hollow shaft containing a mini - Rocket for launch . Alternatively have props in front and RATO in the rear of the drone . Folding wings . Sealed tube for ship or sub use .

nomadski wrote:From a technical point of view , I can say that the UCAV tubes placed on thin tripods ! ( on a rolling Sea ) is total no no ! These need to be enclosed totally in tubes , with folding wings , safe from the elements and in large numbers . Similar to missile tubes that are enclosed . The design should allow any type of missiles or drones or torpedo to be built into the Hull of the ship , ready to fire . A swarm of drones or missiles and not just one or two on a Cake stand !






One simple idea is to design the pusher rotors in the rear of the drone , around a hollow shaft containing a mini - Rocket for launch . Alternatively have props in front and RATO in the rear of the drone . Folding wings . Sealed tube for ship or sub use .

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_propeller

The RATO will sit inside folding propeller or pusher of drone , inside sealed tube . ADD .

GarryB wrote:

Armenia stronger is Turkey's problem.

Did HATO make Ukraine stronger?

When you use entire countries as battering rams against the sides of mountains they don't get stronger...

Yes and before becoming iranian problem it will be Azeri and turkish problems. Armenia would be wiped out easily if nato starts arming them.

I don't see what a ship with a gun that fire 20km away can do against Armenia anyway.

That ship would be better patroling near US carrier at missile distance everytime it is deployed. This is useful. Having it in a closed sea, not at all.

https://en.mehrnews.com/news/211352/Navy-to-receive-hovercrafts-equipped-with-long-range-missile


Hovercraft can travel over ( flat ) land and be housed in shelters or camouflaged . Compared to Ships that can not do this . However for the same price , do we get the same capability as a Ship ? In terms of payload or particularly range ? If range is less , but long enough to make a real difference in the use of various missiles and torpedo , then it is a good plan . Missiles can be launched by submarines too , and they are more survivable than Hovercraft , while at Sea . Submarine can hide in a pen also , something a Ship can not do . If the cost was the same , I pick submarines . If the cost of submarine was ten times the cost of Hovercraft , I pick Hovercraft . Hovercraft are better than Ships ( everything else being equal ) if inland AD is good . Ships are better than Hovercraft , if long range fighter Jets or air cover are available .