Yemeni Forces Destroy UAE Warship

[Arminkh]

There is a world of difference between a low tech rpg and a high tech ashm. The argentinians barely managed it, and it was ineffective, and they had ship and aircraft launched exocets available. I dont quickly see a rebel organization managing it, at least not without experienced help. If it were that easy, it would have been done far more oftem in conflict since the falklands war of 1982.

The things you claim about the missiles and the us assessment, do they come from a credible source? Which?

Just because a missile doesnt reach max rang doenst mean it has to be a short range one.

It is not at all clear if weapons used against us ddgs were the same as that used against the uae ship, which imho clearly was a single ashm with a substantial warhead.

It is all speculative with pieces of the various missile, proper ship damage assessment, data from ew/esm and official statement by parties involved.

I think Jane's is as credible as you can get in the Journalism world given their negative view towards Iran. I had posted this earlier:

http://www.janes.com/article/64650/analysis-mystery-of-the-red-sea-missiles-continues

Read the 2nd paragraph.

 

[Penguin]

I think Jane's is as credible as you can get in the Journalism world given their negative view towards Iran. I had posted this earlier:

http://www.janes.com/article/64650/analysis-mystery-of-the-red-sea-missiles-continues

Read the 2nd paragraph.

Yes i posted that too. But like i said, there is nothing that mandates a 120+ km missile to fly the full distance. Besides, there is the. C70# series to consider also. So, that is back to where we were: speculation.

The article by janes does not address the quality of iranian or chine missiles or others. It also does not substantiate what you claim to be the us assessment.

The thing is that I know U.S and I'm sure there can't be any more biased report than those published by U.S government.
though the source of doubt is Americans who find their report so biased that even themselves can't believe it.

So in essence since there is no unbiased source whatsoever, it all remains speculative, including false flag assertions and/or alledged radar glitches. G'day.

 

[mohsen]

So in essence since there is no unbiased source whatsoever, it all remains speculative, including false flag assertions and/or alledged radar glitches. G'day.

there is unbiased source and that's Yemenis who said they haven't fired any missile toward Americans (let alone three times), in the other side Americans haven't offered any deviance.
so I assume there have been no missile at all, and any report which mentions this is more credible.

 

[Hack-Hook]

@Penguin well if one missile fail then its acceptable if two fail that also acceptable if three fail I say Ok , but if all of them fail to even fly 30km then thats something to think about, Specially if that missile proved itself before.

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin well if one missile fail then its acceptable if two fail that also acceptable if three fail I say Ok , but if all of them fail to even fly 30km then thats something to think about, Specially if that missile proved itself before.

For all we know its not a missile but an artillery rocket being used. Or a ballistic missile. Point is: at this moment all is speculation as far as attacks on usn ships is concerned. The material published on swift suggests a shore launched ashm.

Incidentally, the indonesian navy recently experienced two misfires in a row during one demonstration, with chinese missiles....

there is unbiased source and that's Yemenis who said they haven't fired any missile toward Americans (let alone three times), in the other side Americans haven't offered any deviance.
so I assume there have been no missile at all, and any report which mentions this is more credible.

Gday.

 

[Arminkh]

Yes i posted that too. But like i said, there is nothing that mandates a 120+ km missile to fly the full distance. Besides, there is the. C70# series to consider also. So, that is back to where we were: speculation.

The article by janes does not address the quality of iranian or chine missiles or others. It also does not substantiate what you claim to be the us assessment.

Quality of weapons is usually proven in actual combat. Up to now we have two cases where we know Iranian missiles have been used in actual scenario: 1- Against Israeli frigate back in 2006 and 2- Recently against Emirati ship. In both cases results have been more than acceptable: One fired, one hit. So it's up to you to conclude what kind of quality it represents but to me, Iranian missiles do exactly what they are supposed to do even in the hands of not so complicated users like Hezbollah or Houthies.

What I'm claiming is the recent mishaps (or radar glitch or, .....) were not caused by Iranian missiles or Houthies. First because there is no point to deliver inferior missiles to Houthies while we know Noor missiles have already been delivered. 2nd, there is no logical reason for Houthies to attack US navy. 3rd there is no point in attacking the most advanced navy in the world with your less sophisticated missiles when you have Noor in your arsenal. 4th, there is no reason for a missiles with 120km range (export version of Noor missile) to land in sea at 1/3 of its range. Yes the first one might have had an engine problem but what about the second one?

As far as I'm concerned they may not have even been cruise missiles at all. They may have been artillery rockets which again begs the question: What kind of idiot would try to hit ships with artillery rockets if not only for the purpose of false flag?

I'm sticking with my own conclusions: either:

1- KSA arranged for one of the groups onits payroll in Yemen to fire at US ships with a kind of weapon that were not capable of causing any damage at all to convince US to enter the war. Or

2- US saw what happened to Emirati ship and thought what would happen if Houthies decide to fire one of those missiles at one of their ships either by mistake or intentionally? So it decided to take out the radar sites as a preemptive measure. But it couldn't do so without any provocation so made up this story. The only source we have on this incident is US navy alone. So who knows if it really happened at all?

 

[Penguin]

Ok, so the hit on swift you akcnowledge to be iranian missile. Plenty folks here are vehemently denying any iranian missiles involved. So, what is it? Yes or no an iranian missile?
You yourself suggested c801 because that had been recorded as deli ered to yemeni navy. Also recorded is styx/termit/silkworm to army. No word on that. But now you say iranian noor missiles delivered, of which no record.
Ins hetz was hit on the ships crane on the flight deck only, causing relatively minor damage only, while having been fired buy a real dedicated iranianmade land lauch vehicle, with associated rader and fcs.
You ignore the recent debacle with the indonesian navy c70# seriies missiles.
There is only speculation here on this forum on this topic or fire on us ships and uae ship.
Assymmetric warfare by definition means a militarily inferior party attacking a militarily superior opponent. So there goes 2 and 3 out the window.
A perfectly good reason for a 120km missile flying less than that is because the target is nearer, and because the operator is conservative and fires only when the target is well within range. Not to mention any possible failure of rockt or engine, failure of guidance, failure of structure, and improper procedureor the firing crew. When you hotwire a something, its behaviour will likely be more unpredeictable then when following normal procedure.

What kind of idiot would take on a us ddg in a rubber boat packed with explosive? Still, uss cole.

But you know what, if you want it to be so i''ll say it was a false flag.
Have a nice day.

If your basic assumption is that ksa and/us are evil, you will read any info into that framework. Likewise in reverse with other parties. You cannot conduct proper analyses that way. Period. But i dont think that is the objective of many here in any case.

 

[VEVAK]

Tanks are useless!!!!!!!!!! against modern ATGM! And you DON"T need to destroy the Tanks to render it useless all you need to do is disable them!

Tanks are useless against countries with large stocks of ATGM's! Absolutely useless! They are nothing but a big slow moving target! The last Tank battle ended in 1991! Even the U.S. used ATGM's against Iraqi tanks in 2003! That's why ATGM's had more tank kills than the US Abrams in 2003!

 

[mohsen]

General Qani, deputy commander of IRGC Qods force on this incident:
Americans claim that Yemenis have targeted the UAE ship by an Iranian missile, yet that's not true. still there are lots of untolds about this ship and we are waiting for Americans to talk about the death of half of their ship's crew and other secrets of the recent clashes!
till that time I confine myself to mentioning that fact that in the region which is named Middle East, Iran is everywhere, but nowhere.

http://www.mashreghnews.ir/fa/news/...-و-دیگر-اسرار-نظامی-درگیری‌های-اخیر-را-بگویند

 

[echo 1]

Im honestly a little shocked they have not learned anything from the Syrian civil war, plus these are not M1A2s like the US has, these are M1S declassified variant. Meaning they do not have DU armor so they are at a sever disadvantage. On top of all this the defenders know the territory.
And if anything learn form the US do not try to win a war with guns, win the hearts of the people with providing them with basic needs to gain influence. This way money and innocent lives are spared.

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin well if one missile fail then its acceptable if two fail that also acceptable if three fail I say Ok , but if all of them fail to even fly 30km then thats something to think about, Specially if that missile proved itself before.

You also failed to take into consideration the Silkworm missile (Chinese versions of P15 Termit, with ranges varying by subtype between 30 and 80km), which Iran is known to have (Raad). Sipri shows these to have been delivered by Russia to Yemen army in the past. And Iran could also have supplied some. It too uses a drop-away booster to assist launch, so that matches the footage for Swift strike.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-15_Termit

http://globalmilitaryreview.blogspot.nl/2012_07_01_archive.html

 

[Hack-Hook]

You also failed to take into consideration the Silkworm missile (Chinese versions of P15 Termit, with ranges varying by subtype between 30 and 80km), which Iran is known to have (Raad). Sipri shows these to have been delivered by Russia to Yemen army in the past. And Iran could also have supplied some. It too uses a drop-away booster to assist launch, so that matches the footage for Swift strike.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-15_Termit

http://globalmilitaryreview.blogspot.nl/2012_07_01_archive.html

silkworm is not impossible but ,its too big for smuggling inside Yemen, for those ranges there are a lot smaller and more potent system, by the way won't forget china supplied Iran with HY- 2 variant of the missile till 1989 which have a range of approximately 200km and he iranian version "Raad Missile" have an iranian Tolue-4 engine and the same radars used in Noor and the range increased to more than 300km .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raad_(anti-ship_missile)

for that range we could provide yemen with these
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasr-1 150kg warhead with the range of 35km TV-homing, millimetre radar
or even better zafar missile that you can install in a fishing boat and fire from 25km away from any military ship.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zafar_(Anti_Ship_Missile)

 

[Penguin]

silkworm is not impossible but ,its too big for smuggling inside Yemen, for those ranges there are a lot smaller and more potent system, by the way won't forget china supplied Iran with HY- 2 variant of the missile till 1989 which have a range of approximately 200km.

Good reason to wait with firing until the intended target is much closer than max missile range is a) better chances of succefull target acquisition by the missile (esp. important is not properly supported by long range target detection assets) and b) reduced response time for the target.

Noted:

• The 130-15km SY-series were developed [by the Chinese] from the Soviet P-15 Termit.
• The 85km HY-1 received two separate NATO reporting name, the CSS-N-2 Safflower for the ship to ship version and the CSSC-2 Silkworm for the land based coastal defense variant.
• Ra'ad - Indigenously developed long-range (360 km) anti-ship missile based on (200km) HY-2 Silkworm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silkworm_(missile)#HY-2

However...

Russia:

• P15 Termit range of 40 km.
• P-15M heavier and longer version, range of 80 km

China

• SY-1 (C.201) range was 40 km
  
• SY-2: An improved version with extended range to 50 km.
• HY-2 (C.201) equivalent of the P-15M, also known as the C-SS-3 Saccade. Designed for coastal batteries, with a larger airframe, extended range from 30 km of SY-1 to 50 km.
• C-201W: HY-2 variant fitted with a turbojet engine instead of a liquid rocket version, only used for export, 150 km range.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-15_Termit

A truckmounted Silkworm is not any larger than a truckmounted C-80*

Iranian FL-2

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-Cruise-Missiles.html#mozTocId220047

http://snappedshot.com/ghost/nev

 

[Incog_nito]

You also failed to take into consideration the Silkworm missile (Chinese versions of P15 Termit, with ranges varying by subtype between 30 and 80km), which Iran is known to have (Raad). Sipri shows these to have been delivered by Russia to Yemen army in the past. And Iran could also have supplied some. It too uses a drop-away booster to assist launch, so that matches the footage for Swift strike.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-15_Termit

http://globalmilitaryreview.blogspot.nl/2012_07_01_archive.html

PN also has this and I had suggested earlier that old missiles must be utilized like to counter India threat in terms of fishing boats that are carrying weapons. This will give a strong message to IN.

 

[Incog_nito]

Good reason to wait with firing until the intended target is much closer than max missile range is a) better chances of succefull target acquisition by the missile (esp. important is not properly supported by long range target detection assets) and b) reduced response time for the target.

Noted:

• The 130-15km SY-series were developed [by the Chinese] from the Soviet P-15 Termit.
• The 85km HY-1 received two separate NATO reporting name, the CSS-N-2 Safflower for the ship to ship version and the CSSC-2 Silkworm for the land based coastal defense variant.
• Ra'ad - Indigenously developed long-range (360 km) anti-ship missile based on (200km) HY-2 Silkworm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silkworm_(missile)#HY-2

However...

Russia:

• P15 Termit range of 40 km.
• P-15M heavier and longer version, range of 80 km

China

• SY-1 (C.201) range was 40 km
  
• SY-2: An improved version with extended range to 50 km.
• HY-2 (C.201) equivalent of the P-15M, also known as the C-SS-3 Saccade. Designed for coastal batteries, with a larger airframe, extended range from 30 km of SY-1 to 50 km.
• C-201W: HY-2 variant fitted with a turbojet engine instead of a liquid rocket version, only used for export, 150 km range.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-15_Termit

A truckmounted Silkworm is not any larger than a truckmounted C-80*

Iranian FL-2

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-Cruise-Missiles.html#mozTocId220047

http://snappedshot.com/ghost/nev

Can you please give a brief information on Weapons which Houthis have in Yemen?