TEHRAN, Sept. 26 (MNA) -- The commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Navy has dismissed the proposal for the establishment of a direct military hotline between the United States and Iran.There was a somewhat animated exchange on this topic last week between ABC reporter George Stephanolpholous and President Ahmadinejad:
“When we go to the Gulf of Mexico, we will establish direct communication with them. In the view of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the illegitimate presence of the U.S. in the Persian Gulf makes no sense,” Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi said on Monday.
“The Americans should make requests which have something to do with realities,” he added.
Some U.S. media outlets have recently quoted an unidentified U.S. defense official as saying that the U.S. is considering setting up a direct military hotline with Iran after a series of close encounters between U.S. and Iranian forces in the Persian Gulf.
Fearing that a misunderstanding could lead to a wider conflict, U.S. officials are weighing establishing emergency communications but a final decision is still pending, the U.S. official said.
Fadavi said that the United States is afraid of the fact that Iran’s deterrence capability has increased.
“Their objectives are quite clear to us. They only have one way to alleviate their concerns, which is withdrawing from the region,” he added.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You’ve mentioned the longstanding tension between the United States and Iran. There’s been some discussion– here in the United States about one tool to reduce that tension, the possibility of setting up a hotline between the United States and Iran– that could be used to make sure that no incident escalates out of control and that we don’t stumble into a conflict. Would you support establishing that kind of a hotline between Iran and the United States?
AHMADINEJAD: We have founded our foreign policy on relations. We didn’t cut off our relations with the US government. The US government cut off relations with us unilaterally. We don’t think there are any reasons for tensions and we have always said under fair and respectful conditions, we’re ready for talks. We have always welcomed relations between nations. Recently there was a religious group in Iran, and I met with them. I proposed a joint committee between religious leaders to be formed so they could have discussions. So that ideas come together. That’s not a bad thing, that’s a good thing.
STEPHANOPOULOS: How about this military hotline? Would you support something like that?
AHMADINEJAD: You mean for our military forces to be in touch?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Yes, just in case — you know, the idea would be much like what the United States had with the former Soviet Union during the days of the Cold War, a direct line between the leaders or between the militaries so that if there were some kind of a conflict at sea they would have direct communication to avoid the situation from escalating out of control.
AHMADINEJAD: Let me see if I understood you correctly. You mean the US is in a Cold War with Iran? Is that what you mean?
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, I– I was just using it as the analogy just to try to get you to explain what kind of a communication I’m talking about, that’s the closest I could come up with.
AHMADINEJAD: So there is no war. Why should there be a war?
STEPHANOPOULOS: There has been tension, as you said.
AHMADINEJAD: But it has been unilateral. It has been one-sided, meaning the United States government continually acts against us. I don’t think they should do this. Why do they act against a great nation? Have the US gained anything from it so far? We have many areas for cooperation – scientific, economic, nuclear matters. We can cooperate on nuclear matters. Why should we confront each other? We should cooperate.
In a subsequent interview in New York, Ahmadinejad responded with open interest toward the suggestion of a hotline. Apparently the IRGCN commander in charge of the Persian Gulf AO is averse to such a suggestion,
" We didn’t cut off our relations with the US government. The US government cut off relations with us unilaterally. "
ReplyDeleteyeah, it was really unreasonable for Carter to get upset that the Iranians decided to ignore international law, take Americans hostage. even worse, Americans seem to fail to find funny those endless "death to America" chants or the Iran-ordered blowing up of the marine barracks in Lebanon and the torture-murder of CIA Lebanon station chief Buckley.'
Americans just don't understand the wacky hijinks that the fun-loving clown Khomeini encouraged.
Too bad that Americans don't share that sort of fun, and failed to honor Ahmadinejad's visit by having him kidnapped and buggered to death.
Now you can see the kind of idiots who are the so called "commanders" of the military of this nation.
ReplyDeleteBasically they are asking for it by refusing an initiative like this by the Americans.
Did the Soviets reject it on Ideoliogical grounds?
The commander of the IRGCN said ?
ReplyDeleteSo what happened to the commander of Iranian navy ?
Like everything else in that country they have been taken over by the SABZI FUROOSH clan and by talking like that as if he is in a street corner typifies the class of people that are leading our country to destruction.
And besides that do you think that the US navy is worried about some rusty old buckets and some fiber glass boats floating in some pond with an uneducated Sabzi Furoosh as the navel commander talking his bit of rubbish on behalf of the Islamic theocratic regime.
Anno September 27, 2011 6:59 AM
ReplyDeleteThat is a rellay Exil iranian SABZI Forosch or Internet Troll posting.
If the iranian Navy ius too harmless, The US commander was never to interested to establish a hotline. They are faering Iraninan or IGRC Navy.
see the pictures of missilies and Torpedos by uskowiu.
Anon 6:59 AM
ReplyDeleteYour comment just proved that you are a clueless idiot! If Iranian Navy is a joke, then the U.S. Navy should have no fear putting their ships close to the Iranian coast. There is a reason why the U.S. Navy don't want to sail close to the coast and that is to put themselves out of range of your so-called rusty old buckets's antiship missile and torpedoes.
Scythian
ReplyDeleteLet this "clueless idiot" educate you!!
Yes Iran has a few missiles a few missile boats a few anti ship missiles then what buddy ?
You think if US ships are attacked that America will just role over and give in ?
No they wont because the US will blow the IRGCN the IRIAF etc sky high!! If that offends you and the others here then welcome to reality buddy !
Besides no major Navy will put their assets close to a hostile coast and the US navy will be able to reach Iranian assets from a further distance than Iran ever could.
If you don't know that then you should not be going around and name calling people because you lack some basic knowledge as regards US capabilities.
And another thing those ships are not so-called rusty old ships they are rusty old ships!
In the past 33 years Iran hasn't bought a single modern war ship and the ones they claim they build are just a couple and of limited range.
So if you want to live in fantasy and dream that Iran could sink the entire US fleet then dream on.
The Islamic regime is an utter joke and so are the IRGC clowns the so-called commanders.
Anon 10:55 AM
ReplyDeleteYes Iran has a few missiles a few missile boats a few anti ship missiles then what buddy ?
So? These missiles should make the U.S. Navy think twice about launching a preemptive attack on Iran. Think of them as psychological deterrent.
You think if US ships are attacked that America will just role over and give in ?
No, but I do expect the U.S. to find out that Iran is a not pushover should they decide to retaliate against them. Conversely, you shouldn't expect Iran to give in if it was attacked by the U.S.
Besides no major Navy will put their assets close to a hostile coast and the US navy will be able to reach Iranian assets from a further distance than Iran ever could.
That's not a problem for Iran since they, too, can reach American assets with its ballistic missile force from a similar distance. That goes both ways.
If you don't know that then you should not be going around and name calling people because you lack some basic knowledge as regards US capabilities.
For your info, I have more than enough knowledge to understand a great deal about US capabilities and if you're offended by my name-calling, well too bad. You should grow a pair and learn to take insults like a man.
And another thing those ships are not so-called rusty old ships they are rusty old ships!
In the past 33 years Iran hasn't bought a single modern war ship and the ones they claim they build are just a couple and of limited range.
Do the words "Cheonan Incident" ring a bell? South Korea's Cheonan ship, a modern warship of its time, was deliberately sunk by a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine. Keep in mind, the NK's submarine in question was of Soviet-built and was much older, rustier and noisy as well. The fact that Cheonan's advanced sonar radar failed to detect the sub or the incoming torpedo proves that rusty ships in the right hands can pose a formidable challenge to U.S. Navy. They may not be able to annihilate the U.S. Navy fleet, but they can inflict heavy damage upon them.
So if you want to live in fantasy and dream that Iran could sink the entire US fleet then dream on.
I'm under no illusion that Iran could sink the entire US fleet. However, if you think the U.S. can take on Iranian Navy without suffering a single loss, then you're going to be in for a rude awakening.
In fact, I suggest you to take a look at this website, titled Iran Encounter Grimly Echoes ’02 War Game.
According to the article, the classified, $250 million war game shows that it's very possible to employ swarm tactics using dozens of small, agile speedboats to inflict devastating damage on more powerful warships. Here's an excerpt from the article which is an eye opener, even for me:
General Van Riper’s attack was much more complex and sophisticated than anything that could have involved the Iranian boats (Red Team) last weekend. The broad outline of the 2002 war game was reported at the time, but in interviews since last weekend’s episode, General Van Riper and other officers have provided new details about the simulation.
In the war game, scores of adversary speedboats and larger naval vessels had been shadowing and hectoring the Blue Team fleet (U.S. fleet) for days. The Blue Team defenses also faced cruise missiles fired simultaneously from land and from warplanes, as well as the swarm of speedboats firing heavy machine guns and rockets — and pulling alongside to detonate explosives on board.
When the Red Team sank much of the Blue navy despite the Blue navy’s firing of guns and missiles, it illustrated a cheap way to beat a very expensive fleet. After the Blue force was sunk, the game was ordered to begin again, with the Blue Team eventually declared the victor.
Anon 10:55 AM
ReplyDeleteThe Islamic regime is an utter joke and so are the IRGC clowns the so-called commanders.
Maybe to you, but the U.S. and its allies don't share your view. And their views carries a lot more weight than yours or mine.
Scythian
ReplyDelete"You should grow a pair and learn to take insults like a man."
I served in the Iranian army for 8 years and from the beginning I took insults from 1977 to 1984 buddy.I particularly took insults by the IRGC officers when they knew that I served under the Shah.
Believe me no normal person could have taken their disgusting behavior unless your armed with hatred towards them.And no one will understand what I'm talking about unless it happened to them with or without a pair.
So where were you during that time when the country was attacked by Arabs ??
So by you name calling while sitting behind a computer doesn't make you a big man does it ?
But is considered rude in our culture to name call it shows lack of culture with little to say.
Now back to the subject.
The US navy has over 50 nuclear submarines most armed with conventional and nuclear warheads.
Now don't act like a kid and ask yourself can Iranian navy reach let alone touch them when the submarines are submerged somewhere in the middle of the Indian Ocean about 1200 miles away or even more when all they have to do is target and press that button against Iranian targets ?
In fact the US can target Iranian bases from the Pacific Ocean with their ballistic missiles or even while the submarines at rest in the US.
So how can these North Korean pieces of junk go all the way to deep Indian ocean or the Pacific ocean ?
You think an experienced navy with a long history of warfare is going to park it's ships in the Persian gulf or the Sea of Oman for the IRGCN to attack them ?
You need to grow up and understand that when the time comes IRGCN can only harm Saudi navy but US navy is no joke one of it's aircraft carriers carries at least 90 aircraft multiply that by 15 carriers.
The facts are that soon as Iran launches a ship submarine or plane it will show on US Radars and Sonars as clear as daylight and will be dealt with.
Therefor all the main Iranian subs the Russian built ones a total of three which the US has kept a track on will be sunk in the first day.And those swarm tactics is pretty useless if the US navy is a thousand miles away outside the Persian gulf.
As for your last comment the US does use psychological warfare and claim false information to lead the enemy in a different direction making the enemy believe they are strong so that the enemy can reinforce their failures against a US attack.
Do you remember in the early nineties when they said how strong Saddam's Republican Guards were?
So what happened then?
"Do the words "Cheonan Incident" ring a bell? South Korea's Cheonan ship, a modern warship of its time, was deliberately sunk by a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine. Keep in mind, the NK's submarine in question was of Soviet-built and was much older, rustier and noisy as well. The fact that Cheonan's advanced sonar radar failed to detect the sub or the incoming torpedo proves that rusty ships in the right hands can pose a formidable challenge to U.S. Navy. They may not be able to annihilate the U.S. Navy fleet, but they can inflict heavy damage upon them."
ReplyDelete1st that submarine was North Korean built not Soviet.
2nd the attack took place in extremely shallow waters; about 150 feet. Shallow waters tend to limit a sonar's effective range and blind active sonar with riverb from the seafloor.
3rd The Cheonan had very limited ASW capability, it was build for anti-surface warfare, and is not equipped with anti-torpedo countermeasures like US Warships. Its hull sonar was a low end system designed more for torpedo warning and target tracking not for searching.
4th any surface warfare officer would tell you that in a 1 vs 1 fight between a warship and a sub the sub always has the advantage, which is why US surface ships work in groups with Seahawk helicopters, P-3C Orion sub hunters and our own Nuclear Submarines.
Now if a poorly equipped midget sub can sink a modestly equipped corvette, imagine what a US Nuclear submarine could do? (we have 52 of them BTW, that is 5 1/2 for each Iranian combat ship over 1,000 tons displacement) Iran's surface fleet has far less sophisticated ASW equipment than the Cheonan. It would be a replay of the Falklands times ten (1 HVA torpedoed by UK SSNs and 4 enemy warships trailed by UK submarines).
I hear a lot about how Iran will "own" or "dominate" the Persian/Arabian Gulf in any war but they fail to realize that the US would simply coincide the Gulf to them, seal the gulf off with CAPTOR Mines then park their carriers 800 miles off the Iranian cost; out of range of IRIAF bombers and pound them.
Scythian,
ReplyDeleteyou just have no idea at all of the power of the US military. Iran has many brave men, and they fought for long and hard years against an Iraqi military that was savaged by the USA and driven out of Kuwait in 100 hours....with tens of thousands of iraqis killed and 75,000 wounded.
US military deaths were about 400.........mostly killed in accidents with less than 200 dead from Iraqi fire.
In 2003, with a smaller force, the US invaded Iraq and took over the country in 5 weeks with losses of less than150 killed in action.
Iran can not defend itself from the US in the unfortunate event that war breaks out between the two countries.
Iran has a tiny navy of no power and no range and an air force that is too small and weak to even send up against the US air force.
TLAM Strike
ReplyDeleteThanks for your contribution regarding US navy capabilities.
It just mystifies me how some people believe that by owning a few gun boats armed with anti ship missiles and midget submarines plus some anti ship coastal missiles they can challenge a countries armed forces that was built to destroy the mighty Soviet Union.
This kind of uneducated attitude exists in the IRGC or IRGCN.
Unfortunately our country is been run by a bunch of ex fruit market stall holders who have become "Generals" without any officer training just because during the Iran Iraq war they obeyed the mullahs tantrums to capture a hill or two or to send poor kids over mines. Basically just point straight ahead and hope for the best !
This is how the IRGC "Generals" received their tin foil stars.
Meanwhile the real soldiers that went to officer school were treated like idiots and not promoted and kept on lower pay because they knew the realities and loved their country and despised the mullahs.
...you served until 1984???...okay so u must be uptodate... ;-) man i think the IRCG was very bad to you because you was from shah time as you have said by your own...its not very useful to note that you have served when its nearly 30 years over...this is not very helpful for us...
ReplyDeletesorry but it sounds like you have served until last month...
the only mistake iran is doing is to show US its capacity TO MUCH...
by the way...iran can learn a lot of lybian restistant and how US and NATO are acting in this war...and i think they are monitoring this very exactly...
Mr. Uskowi u are in the TOP 10 of Iran Sites ( for me )...but the place i will keep secret :-)
Thank you!
Is this Commander the same comedian that said Iran will send it's ships to the American coast?
ReplyDeleteThey have made Iran into a laughing stock the jokers.
TLAM Strike.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your analysis of the capabilities of the US Navy.
However it is and will always be Persian Gulf. There has never been an Arabian Gulf.
Now if a poorly equipped midget sub can sink a modestly equipped corvette,
ReplyDeleteYes Iran'c primitive missile was able to hit and destroy the Israel'sw corvette bristling with the latest radar and all other gadgets. Remember during the last Lebanese war!
Or come to think Hezbollah primitive rocket launchers destroying the mighty Israel un-destructible tanks.!
Tha'ts the promlem over reliance on technology, cannot even defeat some backwards Afghans.
Anon 1:58
ReplyDeleteIran doesn't have very many midget subs and the UDNavy has many more full-sized subs and plenty of warships with much, much better weapons.
nowhere near as good AND nowhere near as many in the water and in the air when Iran has to try to defend its territory means that Iran is going to lose very badly and very quickly.
This isn't going to be anything like Lebanon because the US isn't going to have to worry about hitting civilians and isn't going to be using ground troops until Iran's defenses have been destroyed.
Whatever the regime is telling its supporters is not to be believed. After two weeks, there might be 200 dead Americans and tens of thousands of Iranian dead.
Go and read a book before you talk rubbish!
ReplyDeleteIRGCN midget submarines and missiles wont be able to touch let alone destroy US ships while parked in the Indian Ocean and sad to say giving a pounding to the IRGCN IRIAF !
Anyone who thinks Iran's navy conventional forces stand a chance against the US is dreaming. The only weapon Iran has that can threaten the US and Israel are the missiles (an F4 can be shot down, a missile flying at mach 10 is a different story). Iran patriots can give the government credit for focusing on a weapon that can actually deter, but those who want to proclaim the power of the conventional forces like jets, tanks and ships are dreaming.
ReplyDeleteIran's military is certainly not in the same league as the US's military. No argument about it, but it does raise a pertinent question: With all the vast firepower the US had at its disposal, why has the US not taken military action against Iran for all these years? The reason I say this is because I've been hearing about the threats of military strike on Iran from the US on so many occasions in the last decade and yet none of them has ever materialized. In that same decade, Iran has been steadily making progress on its nuclear program as if it has been ignoring the US's warning not to pursue this path. Not only that, but they have increased their efforts to disperse their nuclear assets (and decoys as well, see article: Iran Uses Fear of Covert Nuclear Sites to Deter Attack) all across the country which frustrate the U.S. military planners.
ReplyDeleteIn retrospect, Dubya had the balls to take action action against Iraq and Afghanistan. Bizarrely, he had the same balls to reject an Israeli request for advanced refueling aircraft that could aid Israel in its mission to strike Iran's nuclear sites. Reason for rejection remain unclear to this day.
Looking toward in the future, I don't know what steps the US will take against Iran, but I do know one thing. Iran is getting closer to its nuclear goal and the US's window of opportunity to strike Iran is getting smaller by the day (or maybe that opportunity was gone already).
Go and read a book before you talk rubbish!
ReplyDeleteIRGCN midget submarines and missiles wont be able to touch let alone destroy US ships while parked in the Indian Ocean and sad to say giving a pounding to the IRGCN IRIAF !
You're the one who's talking rubbish. Iran does not need to launch missiles at the US ships in the Indian Ocean when they can launch them at the nearest targets, the US bases stationed in the Gulf countries.
Also, parking US ships in the Indian Ocean would have to be the stupidest move ever. They may be safe from Iranian reach, but with no one to patrol the Strait of Hormuz, Iran would see this as an opportunity to deploy mines across the strait and bring the flow of oil to a halt, thereby spiking oil prices worldwide. By the time the US Navy retake control of the strait, the damage would have already been done.
P.S. Just so you know I'm not the same person as Anon 1:58 PM that you responded to before.
Very Soon Iran will have new aircraft carrier and it will be better than all American aircraft carriers go Iran go!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.presstv.ir/detail/201620.html
Anon 8:52 PM
ReplyDeleteIran hasn't even got some long range submarines and you believe those liars will have aircraft carriers ?
Grow up man don't believe everything this hidden imam government spews out.
"Also, parking US ships in the Indian Ocean would have to be the stupidest move ever. They may be safe from Iranian reach, but with no one to patrol the Strait of Hormuz, Iran would see this as an opportunity to deploy mines across the strait and bring the flow of oil to a halt, thereby spiking oil prices worldwide. By the time the US Navy retake control of the strait, the damage would have already been done."
ReplyDeleteThe trick would be to mine the strait before the USN and USAF destroy the entire IRIN/IRGCN. Don't forget that the US has mines too and could blockade Iran's naval bases. Everything in the Iranian military is tracked and placed on a prioritized list for destruction.
The US Response to an Iranian attack in the Gulf Region would be something like this...
Phase 1 (H Hour): Stealth bombers and Tomahawk missiles would be used to destroy Iranian Air Bases by cratering runways, destroying aircraft shelters and tank farms.
Phase 2 (H Hour): tactical aircraft and submarines would mine Iranian Naval bases and sink ships in port.
Phase 3 (H Hour to H+3): tactical aircraft would destroy Iranian ships at sea. US SSNs trailing Iranian submarines would neutralize them.
Phase 4 (H Hour): USAF assets and shore installations would jam maritime search radars and communications on the Iranian side of the gulf.
Phase 5 (H Hour to H+4): USAF bombers would strike C4I installations in Iran.
Phase 6 (H Hour +8): with IRIAF bases destroyed AWACS and JSTAR aircraft would operate over the Gulf directing attack helicopters and tactical fighters against IRCGN craft and CDM Batteries threading shipping.
Phase 7 (H Hour + 18): With air cover Mine Countermeasures Vessels would clear corridors though the straits for convoys escorted by warships.
Phase 8 (D Day +1): Mop up operations would be conducted against remaining Iranian air and naval forces. USAF bombers on their second sortie from CONUS bases would hit Iranian nuclear and WMD facilities. Convoy escorts would continue.
----"Iran does not need to launch missiles at the US ships in the Indian Ocean when they can launch them at the nearest targets, the US bases stationed in the Gulf countries. "----
ReplyDeleteand just how will launching missiles at targets away from the fight help save Iran from getting pounded into rubble?
all that would accomplish would be to make sure that Iran got pounded harder and longer.
Anon 8:31 PM
ReplyDelete"You're the one talking rubbish.Iran does not need to launch missiles at the US ships in the Indian ocean when they can launch them at the nearest targets,the US bases stationed in the Gulf countries."
Just listen to yourself you haven't a clue what your saying.
You honestly believe the US is going to let a tin pot regime in Tehran get away with their childish antics by launching their primitive missiles at US bases and expect the US not to retaliate ?
I repeat again the US navy will be able to anchor their ships a thousand miles away in the Indian ocean to launch their devastating attacks against the Iranian forces on the mainland and the Persian Gulf.
By stationing their ships at that distance the IRIAF and the coastal anti ship missiles the boats with their swarm tactics and the use of the mini subs have been rendered useless.
All that is left are targets.
The large surface ships and the three Russian built submarines will be sunk within 24 hours.
Now if that is so hard for you to understand that those are the facts then go and read some books as regards US capability against an unfortunate Iran run by idiotic cretins that deserve to be locked up in a lunatic asylum.
I remember these type of people when I used to talk to them in street corners in Tehran.
ReplyDeleteThey have no logic what so ever and believe what ever their masjed tells them.
What has happened now is that the masjed has taken over the country and uses the nations resources to promote their propaganda and twisted views at the nation.
Fortunately only a few gullible minority of people believe their hogwash and one such person is their ardent fan which he is constantly promoting their rubbish on Uskowi on Iran.
Therefor all the main Iranian subs the Russian built ones a total of three which the US has kept a track on will be sunk in the first day.
ReplyDeleteAccording to what I read in the military article, The USN was keeping track of the Iranian subs, but only if they have resurfaced. Thy will be lucky if they can track and locate them deep below the surface.
The NATO called these subs "Black Hole" for a reason.
Falcon,
ReplyDeleteI've been wondering the same thing. The US regard Iran as the number one threat yet the US seem hesitant to take military action against Iran. There must be some kind of forces that are preventing US from doing something about Iran. What forces are they, I don't know. Only time will tell.
A day will soon come when the IRGCN Commander will beg the US for the hotline.
ReplyDeleteCic5ME-AG Desron12
"According to what I read in the military article, The USN was keeping track of the Iranian subs, but only if they have resurfaced. Thy will be lucky if they can track and locate them deep below the surface.
ReplyDeleteThe NATO called these subs "Black Hole" for a reason." When Poland and Romania joined NATO the US got full access to the Kilo class submarines in their navies. I know USN sailors who have spent time aboard them during war games. It can be assumed that every aspect of the Project 877 class submarine has been compromised to western intelligence services.
Iran's Kilo submarines are in fairly bad shape. They have lost most of their Anechoic tiles. meaning they are much nosier and have a higher active sonar footprint now than their foreign equivalents.
Also remember that the Kilo's Iran received were not the advanced versions operated by Russia and China or now available for export those are the Project 636 class. The Project 877 class has many out dated systems like the MGK-400 sonar which is a analog system with digital converters capable of automated tracking of only 2 targets and is incapable of conducting proper narrowband (LOFAR) frequency analysis (The current MGK-400EM Digital system can track 12 targets and can perform LOFAR/DEMON analysis on two simultaneously and has double the detection range).
Victor
ReplyDelete"What forces are they,I don't know."
Didn't you hear it was the forces of witchcraft !
Victor
ReplyDelete"NATO called these subs "Black Hole" for a reason."
True NATO did call them Black Hole but don't forget Iran has only three of these submarines and they operate in shallow waters despite its nick name these subs pose no long term threat.
TLAM Strike,
ReplyDeleteDon't take my word for it. I just told you what I read in the article (I think it was Stratfor). Like I said, the US Navy was tracking one Iranian sub for a while then they lost track of it when it went underwater. Sea Hawk was sent to find that sub, but couldn't locate it. A few days later, the same sub popped up again on the ship's radar several miles from the spot it originally submerged.
Actually the Kilos are not designed for shallow water operations. They are far too big to operate in the Gulf for example, where the average depth can be less than the length of the submarine!
ReplyDeleteThe Kilos are huge for a diesel submarine, some of the largest SSKs in the world. They are intended for open ocean and sea going operations in the North Atlantic, North Sea and Baltic Sea.
The problem for Iran is that its Kilos are based in Bandar Abbas where the waters are very shallow to medium until they head sufficiently south east though Gulf of Oman to the Arabian Sea. That bottleneck would be DEATH in wartime. I imagine the coasts of Oman and the UAE have LFA SONARs placed on the seafloor. From Bandar Abbas to the deep basin of the Arabian Sea is about 200 Nmi, half the Kilo's submerged endurance. But that is if it travels in a strait line, which submarine do not; not because its predictable but they need to clear their baffles and maneuver to conduct TMA tracking and localization on contacts. So they might end up on their patrol station with only 100-150 nmis of "creeping" range to work with, at tactical speeds need not just for attacking but the tracking of fast moving contacts the remaining battery life would be eaten very fast, maybe 20-30 nmi of tactical range. Now they could keep their battery charged up by snorting every day for an hour or so but the moment they fire up those diesels in moderately deep water they run the risk of a US hydrophone array picking them up. As a result the Kilo would be forced to move inshore every couple of days to snort in the coastal traffic where the background noise makes it easier to hide. We have a blue/green water submarine tied to brown water to recharge, this is very bad and could easily lead to an operational casualty or a predictable cycle that could lead to an ambush by a US hunter killer submarine.
In addition while the Kilo maybe quiet on batteries Iran's Kilos (as I mentioned before) no longer carry many of their Anechoic tiles as seen in the photos and video from their mission to Djibouti. This means that ships, aircraft and submarines can detect them far easier with active sonar which compounds on the problem that the Kilos have in that department already: their large size makes them easier active sonar targets. Aircraft like the new MH-60R Strikehawk which has both Sonar buoys and a LFA Dipping Sonar would be murder to these boats.