Iran unveils squadrons of flying boats

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by spy66


Iran has never stated on the news that they will use these crafts to attack US war ships. They go on to say that these crafts can be armed with anti ship missiles and a machine gun. That gives them a attack capability.

And what would be the purpose of arming them with ANTI SHIP MISSILIES if they weren't going to attack ships.

Who's ships would they most likely be attacking - the US navy.

edit on 1-10-2010 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)

You can imagine this how ever you like. But i hardly think these crafts would be Iran's first choice to attack the US fleet .Even though the can attack ships.

I have a gun and a dry suit. that does not mean i will charge a damn ship.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


So they are not gonna attack large vessels with these flying boats, what is your point again?

These flying boats can be used for petrolling the sea, don't you think? Like you can watch out for drug smugglers, for spies, for illegal entry.

That is exactly why I posted that huge picture of American navy boats, with machine guns. You didn't tell me what are the purpose for those?

reply to post by butcherguy


What is the question?

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


What is sad is the view people have of America's Military superiority. Yes we have Jet fighters and aircraft carriers, Nukes and Satellite tracking, Thats all great. You don't need laser guided I.C.B.M. to wage an effective war campaign. You simply have to work around the enemy. America does not effectively wage war in a surgical manner. If we did we would have succeeded in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (9 years ago) We have a broad sword. Large and relatively slow to move. Don't be fooled into dismissing the "little guy" most of the time you'll end up wondering how you got on your back.

Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

 

What is sad is the view people have of America's Military superiority. Yes we have Jet fighters and aircraft carriers, Nukes and Satellite tracking, Thats all great. You don't need laser guided I.C.B.M. to wage an effective war campaign. You simply have to work around the enemy. America does not effectively wage war in a surgical manner. If we did we would have succeeded in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (9 years ago) We have a broad sword. Large and relatively slow to move. Don't be fooled into dismissing the "little guy" most of the time you'll end up wondering how you got on your back.

This can be compared to a football game where the bets ranked team play against a lover ranked team. The high ranked team is usually beaten because they take to lightly on their opponent. They usually celebrate their victory before the game is played, so they show up unprepared.

NB. A weapon is never better than the men who holds it. A unit is never better than the men who serves in it, no matter what the tag is. If the men holding the big guns aren't determined, the great weapon is less great.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Foppezao

 

Yeah right that's why after 30 years they still try to keep the F14 with cannibalizing spare parts in the sky untill they fall apart..

Ohhh but they also have domestic jets, designed by them.

Just wondering, are those jets in big demand?
Do they export a lot of them?

Oozyism!

There.
I quoted myself so you could read it all.

In your post, referencing this one, you were "wondering if I read this part" of your post.

I should wonder if you read mine.

reply to post by butcherguy

Just wondering, are those jets in big demand?
Do they export a lot of them?

IS that the questions you wanted me to answer?

That is pretty stupid because you know the answers already/

No, and no.

What is your point?

reply to post by oozyism
Thanks for the answers.

I never bothered to look for the answers, so I did not know.

I am going to have faith that you did check into it.

BTW, thanks for the critique on my questions. I am still learning.



Oh, I am sorry. I did not answer one of your questions directly.

What is the point?

See if I can spell it out for you. You made a statement about Iran's homegrown jet aircraft.
Since you made the statement, I took for granted that you had some knowledge to share about the subject.

I asked two questions about the subject, hoping that you could enlighten me.

And you finally did.

That is the point to it all. Again, thank you.

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Hey, at least they are trying to develop something (not nuclear) and that's more than many others in that neighborhood are doing.

edit on 28-9-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)

Non nuclear.. and I want one. This is what Iran needs to bring it together. Their main export should be flying boats.
Second verse*

Originally posted by oozyism
So they are not gonna attack large vessels with these flying boats, what is your point again?

They didn't say what they would attack but I'm pretty sure arming them with rockets and missiles implies they would attack ships. Or are you suggesting they are air superiority fighters?

Originally posted by oozyismThese flying boats can be used for petrolling the sea, don't you think? Like you can watch out for drug smugglers, for spies, for illegal entry.

Thats what they were built for and they should stay with that. Arming them with more advanced weapons implies they intend to use them in combat and as I said before that is ridiculas.

Originally posted by oozyismThat is exactly why I posted that huge picture of American navy boats, with machine guns. You didn't tell me what are the purpose for those?

You didn't ask.

Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest
America does not effectively wage war in a surgical manner. If we did we would have succeeded in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (9 years ago) We have a broad sword. Large and relatively slow to move. Don't be fooled into dismissing the "little guy" most of the time you'll end up wondering how you got on your back.

The US forces don't fight surgical because of the ROE. Its nice ignore the fact that the US's enemies don't follow any ROE, or any rules of war for that matter, which handicap's the US forces right of the go because they have to fight by rules and their enemies don't.

If the US forces were allowed to write their own ROE, without the imput of idiot politicians, we would see some very surgical fighting.

reply to post by tooo many pills


tooo many pills,

Go to Trade-a-plane and search for Lake Amphibian, and American built craft that is certified as air worthy by the FAA. The brand has been around for about forty years. Expect to pay about $100,000 for a new one with enough
"clocks" for instrument flight conditions. They are really cool, but not very common because they do not fit well
around boat docks because of the low wing.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker

They didn't say what they would attack but I'm pretty sure arming them with rockets and missiles implies they would attack ships.

Arming them with rockets and missiles implies they would attack ships? Really

You dug your own grave, and now you can't get out.

So you admit that they never said they would attack ships with it, but you say that they can, am I right?

but can't this flying boat be used for other purposes? Like petrolling the coasts?

Iran has a huge coast in the south, and in the north. Don't you think this machine would be good for petrolling the coasts?

reply to post by oozyism


It seems like the naysayer is just arguing for the sake of arguing. It's like when the IRGC said they were arming speedboats with missiles and torpedoes and people were crying on here about how it is illogical and it would make the boats too heavy and the Iranians are too stupid to build them and blah blah blah. Yet there's clear IRGC footage of dozens of speedboats with said upgrades moving just fine.

And now naysayers are claiming that Bavar-2s are underpowered and should have multiple heavy engagement systems strapped to them. Maybe, just maybe, these little WiGs are intentionally equipped with light weapons to complement their [I]light recon role[/I] and speed and stealth factors.

And I personally find it hilarious how there are people here dissing Iran by saying there are already old WiG models in the US. Iran never claimed that they invented this technology, they just built an indigenous version for themselves. You want a good example of previous WiGs? Look up the giant WiGs the Soviets composed fleets of in the 60s; they were designed to conduct massive amphibious assaults by first launching rocket barrages and then deploying hundreds of soldiers when they hit the enemy beaches. Now those things were bloody scary and I'm sure that if the IRGC wants WiGs equipped with heavy weapons then they will build much larger units capable of doing much more damage than craft designed for light recon.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Look up the giant WiGs the Soviets composed fleets of in the 60s;

I did. The A-90 was the most successful model.

5 were built.

4 actually flew.

2 of the four that flew crashed.

I looked for evidence of 'fleets' of any Soviet WiG's, didn't find any, especially the giant ones. If you are speaking of the MD-160, it was so wildly successful that they built just one. I think it may have been Soviet era propaganda, that there were fleets of them.
A-90

MD-160

Link to MD-160 photos!

The MD-160 is a really impressive craft to look at, look at the photo link, Igor went to a lot of trouble crawling over the plane to take excellent photos!

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


Being a proud Canuk, I would prefer credit, where credit is due. Way back in the 1940's, we perfected and still
fly, the Beaver with its on the mark ordanance the Mailbag.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
The US forces don't fight surgical because of the ROE. Its nice ignore the fact that the US's enemies don't follow any ROE, or any rules of war for that matter, which handicap's the US forces right of the go because they have to fight by rules and their enemies don't.

If the US forces were allowed to write their own ROE, without the imput of idiot politicians, we would see some very surgical fighting.

ROE are conducive to surgical campaign, especially a counter-insurgency.

If you want restriction look at the ROE for British soldiers in the Troubles. The ROE were strict because every screw up and catastrophe and bloodbath would funnel more volunteers into the ranks of the IRA and the same applies here. ROE are not only there for political reasons.