Iranian Navy | News and Discussions

[mohsen]

You gif tries to have us believe so. The logic flaw thus remains yours.
Sorry, Tay.

usually when a healthy mind sees a fighter with open canopy door, and without any earth beneath it, It concludes something artistic, but apparently in your case things are different. so again it's all about that minimum logic which I talked about.

 

[Taygibay]

Sure man! I'm the delusional one.

If only to stop this Off Topic exchange, so be it!

Good day nonetheless and good luck even more so, Tay.

 

[mister]

usually when a healthy mind sees a fighter with open canopy door, and without any earth beneath it, It concludes something artistic, but apparently in your case things are different. so again it's all about that minimum logic which I talked about.

با سیه دل چه سود گفتن وعظ
نرود میخ اهنی در سنگ
شیخ اجل

Of what use is preaching to a black heart?
An iron nail cannot be driven into a rock.
'Sadi'

 

[Penguin]

You couldn't even contradict that civilian planes can be used for military purposes. I post something you ignored it.



No attacks on any tanker at the time? The U.S. Navy is there to make sure there are no attacks on any tankers during the Tanker War! Go back and see when have tankers started being attacked.

Read and weep.

Grumman F-14 Tomcat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Armament

• Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A1 Vulcan 6-barreled Gatling cannon, with 675 rounds
• Hardpoints: 10 total: 6× under-fuselage, 2× under nacelles and 2× on wing gloves[158][N 2] with a capacity of 14,500 lb (6,600 kg) of ordnance and fuel tanks[159]
• Missiles:
  • Air-to-air missiles: AIM-54 Phoenix, AIM-7 Sparrow, AIM-9 Sidewinder
• Loading configurations:
  • 2× AIM-9 + 6× AIM-54 (Rarely used due to weight stress on airframe)
  • 2× AIM-9 + 2× AIM-54 + 3× AIM-7 (Most common load during Cold War era)
  • 2× AIM-9 + 4× AIM-54 + 2× AIM-7
  • 2× AIM-9 + 6× AIM-7
  • 4× AIM-9 + 4× AIM-54
  • 4× AIM-9 + 4× AIM-7
• Bombs:
  • JDAM precision-guided munition (PGMs)
  • Paveway series of laser-guided bombs
  • Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
  • Mk 20 Rockeye II

Those specifications are F-14D . Iran has F-14A, which don't have ground attack capabilities. Which is whatr poster posted

 

[The SC]

Watch the real actual video at the first link of the first post.

 

[yavar]

آغاز تحقیقات برای ساخت "فالانکس ایرانی"/ مدافع جدید ناوهای نداجا در راه است + جزئیات
خبرگزاری تسنیم: فرمانده نیروی دریایی ارتش از آغاز فرآیند تحقیقات برای ساخت نمونه ایرانی سامانه دفاع دریایی فالانکس خبر داد.

ه گزارش خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری تسنیم، نیروی دریایی ارتش آمریکا از یک سامانه دفاعی دریایی مشهور برای دفاع در مقابل موشک‌های کروز و سایر تهدیدات استفاده می‌کند که فالانکس (Phalanx CIWS) نام دارد.
این سامانه در واقع یک گاتلینگ 6 لول با گلوله‌های 20 میلیمتری است که با سرعت بالا و شلیک‌های پیاپی می‌تواند به سوی یک موشک کروز شلیک کند. این سامانه که به سامانه ضدکروز هم مشهور است، از یک رادار بهره جسته و گاتلینگ (سلاح) نیز در داخل یک برجک قرار گرفته که می‌تواند مسلسل را به سرعت تغییر جهت دهد.
در حال حاضر، جمهوری اسلامی ایران مدت‌هاست که از گاتلینگ‌های متعددی بهره می‌برد. شاید یکی از بهترین و کارآمدترین گاتلینگ‌های بومی و ایرانی "محرم" باشد. این مسلسل همچون گاتلینگ M-61، شش لول است اما در کالیبر، محرم 12.7 میلیمتری و ام61 از گلوله‌های کالیبر 20میلیمتری بهره می‌برد.

گفتنی است، گاتلینگ ام61 آمریکایی که هم‌اکنون روی اکثر جنگنده‌های این کشور نیز نصب است و در ایران نیز، هیمن گاتلینگ روی تعدادی از جنگنده‌های نهاجا نصب و عملیاتی است.
در همین زمینه، امیر دریادار سیاری فرمانده نیروی دریایی ارتش در گفت‌وگو با خبرنگار دفاعی خبرگزاری تسنیم، درباره این سامانه گفت: نوع غربی سامانه فالانکس، پییشرفته‌ترین نوع آن است و جمهوری اسلامی ایران نیز در جهت تولید این سامانه‌ حتما گام برمی‌دارد.

وی با بیان اینکه باید نیروی دریایی ارتش به سیستم‌های دفاعی قوی و روز دنیا مجهز شود، تأکید کرد: هم‌اکنون کار تحقیقاتی روی سامانه فالانکس برای ساخت نمونه ایرانی آن شروع شده است

.فرمانده نیروی دریایی ارتش در ادامه اظهار داشت: تقریبا هیچ سامانه‌ای نیست که در جهت تحقیقات آن اقدام نکرده باشیم. ما از همان روز که امام(ره) دستور دادند، در تولید محصولات دفاعی خودکفا باشید، از همان موقع روی پای خود ایستاده‌ایم

خبرگزاری بین المللی تسنیم - آغاز تحقیقات برای ساخت "فالانکس ایرانی"/ مدافع جدید ناوهای نداجا در راه است + جزئیات


​

 

[yavar]

Iran IRIB 2 "Negahe 2 " brigadier General hossein salami '' Great Prophet 9 maneuver"

Iran IRIB 3 documentary General Ali Fadavi IRGC "Great Prophet (PBUH) maneuver"

 

[SOHEIL]

مانور پیامبر اعظم ۹

 

[SipahSalar]

According to the American wargames (2002), yes they can destroy a whole battle group and seize most of it, In today's world facts, it is worst for the US, since most, if not all of the Iranian small boats are armed with missiles which they did not have than...

But what possible advantage does Iran gain by capturing a carrier?

its suicide boat:

Guy is armed with a modern carrier killer machine gun.

 

[SOHEIL]

But what possible advantage does Iran gain by capturing a carrier?

Take a look at it's systems !

 

[Oldman1]

Those specifications are F-14D . Iran has F-14A, which don't have ground attack capabilities. Which is whatr poster posted

But we don't know what Iran has done to the F-14 since then as I pointed out. And its proven that the F-14 can be modified to ground attack. So saying the F-14 has no ground attack is pretty much thrown out the window. Iran has already shown they can modified their aircraft or other weapons systems.

 

[Oldman1]

well out of Hollywood and in reality Americans radars and sonars are just empty claims, just how many times Iranian drones have flown right above their carriers in Persian gulf? how many times their carriers and navies have humiliated by submarines?

Intercepting a ballistic missile is a pure propaganda like what they did in the second phase of the Millennium Challenge 2002 drill, running a controlled scenario and using rewritten parameters for enemies!

they claim to intercept ballistic missiles, yet in late 2014 their latest testfire of anti ballistic defense system which was aimed against Iranian ballistic missiles failed in Israel, what's the excuse? a glitch, bad conditions, or better to translate: we will change our enemy's parameters to make the system successful.

Well since we are not at war with Iran and you didn't attack the carrier right there, you can claim all you want about recording footage of the carrier crossing through. Its not really that hard when the carrier is just a few miles from shore. We can easily find your boats.

Should I show you videos of successful intercepts of ballistic missiles and warheads?

 

[Hack-Hook]

But we don't know what Iran has done to the F-14 since then as I pointed out. And its proven that the F-14 can be modified to ground attack. So saying the F-14 has no ground attack is pretty much thrown out the window. Iran has already shown they can modified their aircraft or other weapons systems.

You very well knew what Iran did to F-14 as the radar on F-14a did not had the capabilities to track ground targets and if Iran modified that Radar you would have detected the change in the signature of that radar in just seconds.

 

[Oldman1]

You very well knew what Iran did to F-14 as the radar on F-14a did not had the capabilities to track ground targets and if Iran modified that Radar you would have detected the change in the signature of that radar in just seconds.

Really?
About a year before the shooting down of the passenger plane, USS Stark was hit by an antiship missile. What happened there? Why didn't the Stark shoot down any aircraft in response to being targeted?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Really?
About a year before the shooting down of the passenger plane, USS Stark was hit by an antiship missile. What happened there? Why didn't the Stark shoot down any aircraft in response to being targeted?

because maybe the signal from aircraft radar was normal for that aircraft and USA didn't expected its ally Saddam attack them .

by the way i don't see any relation to this incident and the fact that if Iran changed the radar of F-14a US navy would have known about it instantly .