"Underwater Missiles"

[BigRed389]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060402/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_missile

It's not a torpedo, it's an "underwater missile."

 

[Schnugg]

Correct.

Different propulsion method.

 

[Brett327]

Correct.

Different propulsion method.

Pretty interesting, actually. I know the US has been messing around with stuff like this for a while, but the Ruskies have probably been exporting theirs to anyone with two Rubles to rub together.

Brett

 

[Fly Navy]

Interesting, thanks for the post.

The Russian system is unguided, according to FAS. Me thinks nuclear warhead?

Edit: Nevermind, the modernized version has guidance.

 

[Flash]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060402/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_missile

It's not a torpedo, it's an "underwater missile."

The Iranians often meake claims about weapon sytems that are exaggerations or are just plain false, I seriously doubt this claim.

 

[Bevo16]

It's a pretty interesting that the speed of the Iranian missile and the Russian missile are EXACTLY the same.

Either they sold it to them, or they gave them the plans to build them on their own.

 

[Brett327]

It's a pretty interesting that the speed of the Iranian missile and the Russian missile are EXACTLY the same.

Either they sold it to them, or they gave them the plans to build them on their own.

I also love the claim that the device is "undetectable" by sonar. Something tells me that a rocket motor zooming around underwater at 200+ Kts is going to make a lot of noise.

Brett

 

[FlyinSpy]

Pretty interesting, actually. I know the US has been messing around with stuff like this for a while, but the Ruskies have probably been exporting theirs to anyone with two Rubles to rub together.

DARPA is making a push in this technology area, calling it "Underwater Express" - here's the link for you folks who want to get DARPA to fund your building of a prototype in your bathtub:

http://www.darpa.mil/ATO/solicit/underwaterexpress/index.htm

 

[squorch2]

Supercavitating torpedos are nifty technology, but require close (<8000 yds) contact with a target and were, as I understood it, straight-shot weapons, since any fins to steer would break the supercavitating bubble. Although I guess it wouldn't take much for a Kilo or other diesel out there to just sit in a shipping lane and pick off targets as they go by.

fas.org has a basic overview of the Shkval, supercavitating theory, and some secret squirrel spy stuff to boot.

 

[fighterpfeif]

Don't forget that the Persian Gulf is realitivly small and something with that speed could really put a hurt on the shipping lanes and other large ships (CVN). Even if these are second rate, have no guidance, and pack small warheads it still mean that ships will have to take measures that will degrade their performance, in either getting through the Gulf or operating there.

Add in Silkworm SSM, Su-24's, Shabab 3 and soon 4 missiles, SA-10s, possibly nuclear, and 'suicide soldiers' and the Iranians basically have a pretty good military on paper that adds a challenge in limiting their nuclear ambitions, guerilla operations in Iraq, support of terrorism, and control of one of the worlds largest energy supplies.

Get ready for a hard fight.

 

[esday1]

Supercavitating torpedos are nifty technology, but require close (<8000 yds) contact with a target and were, as I understood it, straight-shot weapons, since any fins to steer would break the supercavitating bubble. Although I guess it wouldn't take much for a Kilo or other diesel out there to just sit in a shipping lane and pick off targets as they go by.

fas.org has a basic overview of the Shkval, supercavitating theory, and some secret squirrel spy stuff to boot.

It seems like guidance would be a pretty big problem even if the thing were steerable because of the noise the engine and the bubble would make (so the guidance system would have to filter out those frequencies), and because any sonar system would have to pick up sound either from the small portion of the nose that's in contact with the water or across the vapor gap between the water and the rest of the body. What would the difficulties be with something like this being wire or radio guided?

From the FAS article:

However, the Russians have been advertising a homing version, which runs out at very high speed, then slows to search.

It seems like even a very slight ability to steer without breaking up the supercavitating bubble would make this a pretty dangerous weapon, since at that speed even being able to change course by a few degrees could compensate for any evasive maneuvers the target could take in that limited amount of time.

/uninformed armchair physics

 

[Flash]

Don't forget that the Persian Gulf is realitivly small and something with that speed could really put a hurt on the shipping lanes and other large ships (CVN). Even if these are second rate, have no guidance, and pack small warheads it still mean that ships will have to take measures that will degrade their performance, in either getting through the Gulf or operating there.

Add in Silkworm SSM, Su-24's, Shabab 3 and soon 4 missiles, SA-10s, possibly nuclear, and 'suicide soldiers' and the Iranians basically have a pretty good military on paper that adds a challenge in limiting their nuclear ambitions, guerilla operations in Iraq, support of terrorism, and control of one of the worlds largest energy supplies.

Get ready for a hard fight.

On paper, that is the key part of your argument. Conventional military capabilities are not Iran's strength. The missiles you mentioned are either old (Silkworm) or are just small improvements on old systems (Shahab III). All of their propaganda should not go to your head, the reality is much different. Now if we ever wanted to invade Iran, then we would have a problem. Remember, the Iranians invented modern suicide bombing.

 

[Flash]

It seems like guidance would be a pretty big problem even if the thing were steerable because of the noise the engine and the bubble would make (so the guidance system would have to filter out those frequencies), and because any sonar system would have to pick up sound either from the small portion of the nose that's in contact with the water or across the vapor gap between the water and the rest of the body. What would the difficulties be with something like this being wire or radio guided?

From the FAS article:

Quote:
However, the Russians have been advertising a homing version, which runs out at very high speed, then slows to search.

It seems like even a very slight ability to steer without breaking up the supercavitating bubble would make this a pretty dangerous weapon, since at that speed even being able to change course by a few degrees could compensate for any evasive maneuvers the target could take in that limited amount of time.

/uninformed armchair physics

Okay, do you all believe everything that Santa Claus tells you?! If we believed everything the Soviets claimed their weapon systems did in the Cold War we would be speaking Russian and learning the glories of Lenin right now.

Seriously people, do you honestly think that this super-torpedo can do everything they claim? Did anyone notice that the one fired in the video went straight? Plus, how the hell are you going to turn a torpedo going 200mph underwater? Even if they were, think of the turning radius, it would be wider than a P-3's!!! (like the cheap shot? )

If you believe everything they claim, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.....

 

[HAL Pilot]

Even if they were, think of the turning radius, it would be wider than a P-3's!!! (like the cheap shot? ) ....

Threadjack time to defend my beloved war pig....

Before we deployed to Saudi Arabia in 1988 to escort reflagged Kuwaiti tankers, we took our P-3s to Nellis for some DACM training. We quickly found out that if we went to the deck and denied the fighters the ability to go vertical, we could beat a gun attack. At our cornering speed, we could out turn anything they threw at us. We fought F-14, A-4s, F-15s, F-16, F-18s and F-5s.

The tactic developed was that if an Iranian came at us, dive as close to the water as possible, get to cornering speed and never stop turning (random directions). This limited the fighters to strafing-type passes and they were not very effective. Then it became a matter of endurance. After 3 or 4 passes the fighters were out of gas. The key to this was crew coordination and the ability to maintain/regain visual contact with the fighter as the P-3 turned. We had observers in every window. We were okay up to 2 V 1s then it got hairy.

One of the reasons we felt okay with this less than perfect denefese was becasue the Iranians had problems with the reliability of their air to air missiles. Most just fell off their wings like a dumb bomb when fired.

I used this tactic successfully against an Iranian F-14 once when he came after us. We dodged him 3 times until we got within the U.S.S. R. K. Turner's SM2 envelop and were able to put her between us and the fighter. Then they lite his ass up and told him to break away immediately or he would be shot down. He did. We never figured out if he ever fired his guns at us or was only trying to scare us (which he did...).

end of threadjack

 

[Fly Navy]

ACM in a P-3... who would have thought...