Skip to comments.Iran commissions locally built submarine (PHOTOS)
Posted on 01/15/2006 4:30:21 AM PST by Khashayar
Iran on Sunday commissioned its second domestically built submarine, a craft that can fire missiles and torpedoes simultaneously, state-run radio reported.
The report said the submarine, named Ghadir, was Iran's second homemade submarine, and was unveiled during the third day of military maneuvers in southern Iran.
Iran's armed forces began their biggest military maneuvers Friday in the Sea of Oman and the Indian Ocean on Iran's territorial waters close to Pakistan and involved submarines, warships, missiles, jet fighters and gunships.
In May, Iran officially launched the production of the locally built submarine, claiming it was a stealth craft.
Its name, Ghadir, is derived from a site in the Arabian Peninsula holy to Shiite Muslims, the overwhelming majority of Iran's 69 million people.
Iran produces the Shahab-3 missile, capable of reaching Israel and U.S. forces stationed in the region. Since 1992, it also has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane.
Re your #9 - My immediate thought exactly!
The good old CSS HUNLEY; may she rest in peace!
But let's remember, folks; she did manage to sink one US Warship, even though it turned out to be a suicide mission for the Rebel Submariners.
And Jihhadists don't mind embarking on suicide missions on purpose!
Just before Pearl Harbor the Japs tried to sink a US freighter before it got back to Pearl, having just been released from captivity in a Jap harbor by a US task force.
The Japs were utterly furious over losing their American hostages, and vowed revenge.
A couple of mini-subs, essentially long range crew directed torpedoes, followed the ships all the way back, but the Destroyer kept them at bay until they were nearly at Hawaii, when one of them made a desperate attack, whereupon it was sunk by gunfire from the Destroyer.
This incident was denied by the Navy for years, until just recently they found the sub on the bottom just where the Crew said they sunk it, with a 3" hole through the conning tower. It had two live torps stacked one on top of the other with noses still protruding from the bow.
It looked to be about the same size as this Iranian tub, too.
I agree that the Soviet made Kilo subs are reasonably effective and modern submarines that could pose a significant threat if treated lightly.
However, I'm talking about the indigenous submarines Iran has been building since the mid 1980s based on imported North Korean technology. These subs are almost certainly slow, noisy, and have very limited sensors. Iran also makes torpedoes (supposedly) and several kinds of mines.
I don't think these subs are a "joke" at all. They are, however, relatively unsophisticated and probably don't have the ability to launch anti-ship missiles (such as the Exocet or Silkworm) as suggested in the article. Any indigenous "missile" launched from that pod mounted forward of the sail is going to make the sub far more vulnerable than if Torpedoes or mines are employed.
Sweden has several small submarines. They rejected the use of missiles such as Harpoon for that very reason: Launching the missiles in confined waters (Baltic or Persian Gulf) would quickly give the sub's position away.
I wonder if there are torpedo tubes under the water line?
Does it even HAVE them...
Or IS the whole thing a Kamakazi torpedo?
Re your #47 - "If you want to worry, worry about their Silkworm surface to ship missiles...."
Agreed; isn't that what took out and nearly sunk a Brit Cruiser during the Faulklands thing?
We might get to see how well our radar-directed minigun anti-missle systems work - if at all... if they remember to even turn them on.
I wonder if the Iranians have the Russian / Chicom "SKVALL" hypercavitating rocket torpedoes? You know, the ones that can travel at nearly the speed of sound underwater?
Range on those things is apparently a little limited, but they sound pretty devistating if they get to ya.
This little mini sub ought to make a light snack for one of our hunter-killer subs in the region, don't you think?
That NK sub looks to be smaller than a Nazi U-boat.
Diesel electric, we assume?
Yes, the Silkworm was used in the Falklands, and it would be the greatest threat to shipping. It is very large and effective. They are also rumored to have some old soviet cruise missiles.
I understand that those torpedoes are very recent, and I highly doubt Russia would let anyone have one for a while.
This little guy would not rate a hunter/killer. All you need is a couple of Sea Stallions and a handful of sonobouys, and that thing is history.
Being a diesel/electric makes it quiet, but very short range. It's size would limit its underwater time. It would be nothing but a coffin (IMO).
I thought it was an Exocet missile that sunk the British ship.
Re your #117:
..." kalanishkovs-AK 47 were used to knock down our state-of-the-art Apache helipcopters,..."
Apparently one old guy brought one down with a WW-II era 8MM Mauser bolt-action rifle.
Maybe....give me a second and I'll find out for sure.
You are correct, and I stand corrected! Thanks.
From its looks, it will ferry about five troops at a time.
I find it hard to classify anything that can be carried over open roads on a flatbed semi as a warship. That thing is a joke. It looks just slightly longer than about two of our MK48 torpedoes.
The unimproved KILO is 237 feet.
That thing is gonna make so much racket if it goes over 2 knots that we'll be able to hear it over here in our home bathtubs. It's about as hydrodynamic as a sunken school bus with the doors open and the windows down. It may be a danger to non-combatants with no Sonar, but they better make the first shot count. As far as our warships are concerned, it won't be able to sneak up or even keep up with them in the open ocean.
ASW has made some major leaps since the 60's.