Russia’s novel use of Iranian drones in Ukraine serves as classroom for Western militaries

sorry...I was just quoting your comment...?

 

This type of post derails conversations. This thread has nothing to do with Iran's domestic policies, and losing an argument about drones then attacking the poster's country seems like a tantrum. There is a lot you could be writing about on the current unrest in Iran, it's pretty newsworthy, but that should be in a thread about that topic.

 

....I like it when militaries compare themselves or compare items of equipment as it usually means there's a budget meeting in the offing and they don't want any cuts........I can't remember when anyone in the military ever indicated that "yup all good here...we don't need anything else!"....

 

That is a quote/subtitle from The Drive. I just don't put titles/subtitles of articles I post in quotes, but if it makes a difference, here:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/what-we-know-about-irans-newly-unveiled-catamaran-warship

 

I've no idea what the Drive is?
For example, I was looking at some of the pictures of this thing and was wondering about what use they have.... I mean in practical terms...


4 of these crew served rotary cannon??? On ships these things are really only good as CIWS but to be effective they need to be radar guided so was wondering what the point of them were? I think they've plonked a load of guns on a hull and painted it slate grey and called it awesome so a bunch of admirals have a navy and a career path...not unlike the Royal Navy when there were more Admirals of The Fleet than we had ships....go figure....

 

What argument about drones? I was never engaged in one to lose. I have been clear from the start that this is part of an ongoing effort to push Iranian propaganda as a distraction from real issues. No 'tantrum' or any other term you want to use. No one else is compelled to agree with me or join in.

Additionally, virtually all my posts have been in response to the OP quoting me in order to push more sad propaganda. Every time someone attempts that I will point out precisely what is going on and why.

If you want to get alll hot & heavy with our resident propagandist fanboi about how cool Iranian military stuff is I'm not going to stop you. I'm not even going to engage with you. My point is clear and it doesn't get in your way one little bit.

 

I quoted this message which tried to offer a variety of "theories" about a thread I started which dealt with an issue that is actually quite the topic of military and diplomatic discussions pertaining to the Ukraine war. A thread which contained minimal editorial comments from me and mostly quotes and sources from the MSM and sites affiliated to the US armed forces.

In quoting your message, I asked several questions about your assertions which you failed to respond to, instead following up with more of the same:
1- which "manifest failures of far more important industries" did you have in mind?
2- which actual military systems by Iran (as opposed to experimental prototypes and mock ups) do you consider "fake"?
3- which "absurd exaggeration" about Iran's drones where you referring to?

Since you apparently had nothing to back up your assertions, you instead doubled down by further distracting from the topic at hand.

 

The Drive-War Zone is one of those sites that often try mightily to find ways to ridicule Iranian weapons systems ... I quoted them because it is somewhat the equivalent of having even a notorious anti-Iran troll admit that something from Iran is nonetheless "somewhat impressive."

In terms of the pictures, the most important and telling ones are those that show the 6 vertical launch systems (VLS) on the vessel, as well as the ships overall design along with the armaments it carries. I shared those pictures in my initial post on the subject.

The US Naval Institute (USNI) has an article using satellite imagery to track the latest IRGC navy's Shahid Soleimani class vessels under construction (3 more to be added to the fleet) plus other stealth vessels being constructed.

https://news.usni.org/2022/06/30/potential-new-stealth-missile-boat-under-construction-in-iran



The IRGC navy (not to be confused with the regular Iranian navy), whose theater of responsibility is the Persian Gulf and coastal defense, is famous for its swarming tactics, speedboats, smaller subs, missiles, and drones. However, they have recently begun constructing bigger vessels which used to be within the province of Iran's regular navy. An example of that is the Shahid Roudaki forward expeditionary base ship:


p.s.
Iran's regular navy has its own fleet of larger warships and projects, focused more on blue water missions. Some of them are covered by Sutton in the Forbes article below.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutt...nes-and-a-6000-ton-destroyer/?sh=683bbb5f7e9f

 

Years ago an Undersecretary of the Army told me that "GPS will get you in-theatre, but once there it will be useless due to MEIJI (that's an acronym which included "meaconing" - false beacons, interruption - interittent jamming which sounds like equipment problems, jamming and more... I forget the whole thing). So the answer is on-board tracking. One of the leading systems utilizes a ferrous "ball" in a few ounces of oil which dampens its movement as the host system moves. Tracked magnetically, its movement can be translated into the movement of the host system... cool stuff... good from man-worn to vehicular and more.

C-RAM (Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar) is the US name for the Israeli IRON DOME system. It works great. Then, of course, the new EMP weapons are great for knocking down guided systems like UxV's (Unmanned "x" Vehicle systems. "x" being airborne, surface, subsurface, as applicable.) By the way, in order to comply with the latest left wing "woke" criteria... "unmanned" is now "uncrewed".

 

Iran captured a Predator years ago by compromising the air-land communication system. They managed to land the Predator in Iranian territory. It was quite a technical coup.
As a result, we decided to focus on making autonomous UxV's, with no requirement for a human operator. Early efforts introduced the ability to change routes and even make mission changes based on "caution". Great stuff.

 

There are ways to make GPS guidance systems resistant enough to jamming et al. Experience has shown the most effective way to bring down these UAVs/UACs is through combat aircraft. An Iranian Mohajer-6 was recently shut down by an American F-15 over Iraq. The Israelis have released videos showing a pair of Iranian Shahed-191s shut down by their F-35s. And while the Ukraine air force somehow managed to lose a Mig29 trying to shoot down a Shahed-136, they have already decorated one of their pilots for 5 kills against these drones.

UAV and UAC stand for the same thing, but I didn't realize why exactly the UAV acronym was being replaced by UAC. Thanks.

 

Too late to edit to type UAS instead of UAC...

 

The Washington Post has an article released today alleging that besides a bunch of drones, Iran is planning to deliver precision guided Fateh and Zulfaghar ballistic missiles to Russia.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/10/16/iran-russia-missiles-ukraine/

I don't know if the report is true but I don't think that would be a good idea. First, unlike drones, those ballistic missiles (with their 1 ton warheads) just create different acoustics and impressions, making Iran look almost a party to the conflict. Second, these missiles are part of Iran's "strategic arsenal": no matter how many of them Iran has, it will need them all for its own needs. Third, as long as the Russians are as close to the Israelis as they have been, I wouldn't trust them with these missiles.

On the other hand, I wouldn't mind Iran supplying the Russians with Iran's version of the HIMARS using shoter range versions of the Fateh missile. Those are battlefield systems and shouldn't cause the same issues.

 

I don't believe the Iranians have anything like HIMARS. The deadliness of HIMARS is that each rocket delivers 600 M442 rounds. The M442 is a grenade sized DPICM (Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munition) which has a shaped charged which explodes downwards to pierce armor and splays to the sides for anti-personnel. One round can put a piece of shrapnel in ever square inch of a football field. The original, shorter range MLRS version was the "steel rain" the Iraqis referred to in Desert Storm.

 

https://www.armyrecognition.com/def...w_fath_360_mlrs_like_us_army_with_himars.html

 

Iranian missile versus USA rocket. Interesting. Do you have any info on the payload? Like I said, HIMARS is an area weapon. The Fath looks like a precision weapon, which would be in keeping with the described guidance.

 

Go to minute 1:00 & 1:45-1:50 in that video and a comparison in payload, range, speed and other specs is made. The Fateh 360 carries a 150 kg warhead compared to 90 kg for the typical HIMARS version operated by Ukraine.

 

I'm surprised that a supposed artillery officer demonstrates so little knowledge about artillery. What's even more interesting is that you're so proud of supporting what most countries consider a war crime. Your post shows a complete lack of any understanding of 21st century warfare.

There are no grenades on HIMARS rockets nowadays. Scattering 600 grenades across a few football fields may seem cool until you're force to go pick up every fragment scattered over every square inch of your silly U.S. officer mess.

Yes, every metal fragment you just dumped into that field, you have to go pick up. Why? Because one of those 600 grenades might have not gone off and now you have to make sure all of them are accounted for. Innocent child walks onto grenade and blows up, the mother just became a suicide bomber and U.S. soldiers get labeled baby-killers.

Here. You can read more if you like.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/wea...uster_bombs_for_us_army_central_71601171.html

 

That's not the question. HIMARS uses DPICM, not just an explosive. The HIMARS round detonates about 100 meters in the air over the target and spreads the M442 rounds over a large area. A simple comparison of weight doesn't really describe the difference.

 

https://inews.co.uk/news/iranian-drones-russia-ukraine-manufactured-british-us-components-1895442

Iranians have been able to bypass the sanctions under Biden and Obama more easily. They have obtained the chips from other countries needed to make drones. Which is one reason why sanctions on Russia should be applied to Iran.

 

You're still talking about fictional HIMARS rockets.

 

What has made HIMARS effective weapons in Ukraine isn't their sub-munitions but their nimble use allowing quick precision hits while being mobile, easy to load and reload, and quick to move around in different terrain. In all these characteristics, the Fateh 360 is even better than the HIMARS based on its specs.

 

That report is bogus propaganda.

 

Each HIMARS round contains 600 M442 submunitions that have a shaped charge that blow down to pierce armor and splay to the sides for soft targets and personnel. Each round can put a piece of shrapnel in every square of a football field. The round detonates about 100 meters above the ground and spreads the rounds over a wide area.

I didn't get that from any report. I was a Commissioned Officer in the US Army, serving as a Field Artillery Officer for over 20 years. I didn't read this in some civilian report. I was trained at Fort Sill, the US Army Field Artillery School (now the "FIRES Center of Excellence")

 

I think the administration is still trying to appease Iran to get their signature on a new nuclear deal. They've dedicated a lot of time, energy, and groveling to this, across two (Obama/Biden) administrations, so I don't think they are going to drop it now, Russia or no Russia. Maybe if the Iranian government issued a statement that there were only two genders...