Iranian Fast Attack Craft

[kach22i]

These look difficult to deal with, first time I've seen them.

Iranian Fast Attack Craft
http://uskowioniran.blogspot.com/2008/06/iranian-fast-attack-craft.html

New Iranian-built fast attack craft with platforms for two C-701 (Kowsar) anti-ship missiles.

There is a reason the US Navy destroyed all of our PT Boats after WWII, didn't want anyone else to get a hold of them.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Nothing a Mark-48 can't handle. Easily.

[Jeff Higgins]

Can they outrun an F-22? F/A-18? Didn't think so...

[onewhippedpuppy]

Then we'll let them deal with the pirates.

[legion]

This is another problem that is easily solved with a MOAB in port and much harder to deal with out at sea.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Can they outrun an F-22? F/A-18? Didn't think so...

Little boats can sneak up on you and are often not primary targets until they are on you like a gnat.

Pesky things they look like, which is all I'm saying.

[charleskieffner]

perfect lake powell ski boat!

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Nothing a Mark-48 can't handle. Easily.

i'm sure these things can outrun a mk48,
They don't look like oil tankers, so besides speed, i'm sure they will turn faster as well...

[Seahawk]

Big problem is swarm tactics at night in confined sea lanes...think Straights of Hormuz.

It is one thing to detect, it is a whole other bad of tricks to classify and identify prior to engagement based on current ROE.

Again, that is one of the reasons the Navy has a program of record, called Small Tactics UAS (STUAS) that will be competed early next year. System will be ship or land based, 24 hour endurance and a great sensor package. It will replace the current system I posted earlier.

Quick sea story:

I was the Air Boss on the USS La Salle during the PGW I...we did a bunch of mine clearance work and were the first ship into Kuwait the day the war ended. I also got to do a lot of flying.

We stayed in Kuwait 5 days before returning to Bahrain. On the way back, late one night, we were attacked by pirates who mistook us for a commercial ship. Four small boats armed with machine guns engaged us, two on each side, one forward, one slightly aft. The Captain of the ship, still a good friend of mine first called general quarters and gave us permission to engage. He then called one of the carriers to provide air support.

The engagement was brief since each side of the the La Salle had multiple 50 cals and small grenade launchers. My guys (the Air Department) owned all the aft armament and did very well. Engagement lasted maybe five minutes.

One potato, two potato, three potato later (45 minutes) the F-18 checks on station to help.

Long story, short: can't always count on CAP.

[charleskieffner]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Big problem is swarm tactics at night in confined sea lanes...think Straights of Hormuz.

It is one thing to detect, it is a whole other bad of tricks to classify and identify prior to engagement based on current ROE.

Again, that is one of the reasons the Navy has a program of record, called Small Tactics UAS (STUAS) that will be competed early next year. System will be ship or land based, 24 hour endurance and a great sensor package. It will replace the current system I posted earlier.

Quick sea story:

I was the Air Boss on the USS La Salle during the PGW I...we did a bunch of mine clearance work and were the first ship into Kuwait the day the war ended. I also got to do a lot of flying.

We stayed in Kuwait 5 days before returning to Bahrain. On the way back, late one night, we were attacked by pirates who mistook use for a commercial ship. Four small boats armed with machine guns engaged us, two on each side, one forward, one slightly aft.. The Captain of the ship, still a good friend of mine first called general quarters and gave us permission to engage. He then called one of the carriers to provide air support.

The engagement was brief since each side of the the La Salle had multiple 50 cals and small grenade launchers. My guys (the Air Department) owned all the aft armament and did very well. Engagement lasted maybe five minutes.

One potato, two potato, three potato later (45 minutes) the F-18 checks on station to help.

Long story, short: can't always count on CAP.

i love happy endings!

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Little boats can sneak up on you and are often not primary targets until they are on you like a gnat.

Pesky things they look like, which is all I'm saying.

O.k., that makes sense. I don't know much about military hardware and whatnot, but I guess I thought there wasn't much "sneaking up" on anyone these days, at least not in a boat. Don't we have RADAR that will pick these guys up long before they are a threat, and simultaneously identify them as ours or not? Maybe I watch too many movies...

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

O.k., that makes sense. I don't know much about military hardware and whatnot, but I guess I thought there wasn't much "sneaking up" on anyone these days, at least not in a boat. Don't we have RADAR that will pick these guys up long before they are a threat, and simultaneously identify them as ours or not? Maybe I watch too many movies...

It looks like it's based on a self righting coast guard rescue type craft, which means it could use heavy weather to disguise it's surface to surface radar signature.

[kach22i]

The upper part looks like it could go underwater/inverted like a US Coast Guard self righting rescue boat.

Many small fast targets in bad weather, with a lot of other stuff going on, in a narrow strait.......................not a good combination.

I fully accept that these craft and crew would have to be considered sacrificial if going up against a US Carrier task force (in any conditions).

Pesky and dangerous, one mistake, one error or pause in making a hard decision and the scale could tip. This we have seen many times over over the last 30 years.

Many complex US weapon systems last time I read, were on stand-by and took 20 minutes or more to become weapon ready.

http://www.mlb44.com/id1.html

http://www.mlb44.com/id7.html


http://www.mlb44.com/id3.html

ű Purpose: Search & Rescue Work Under Heavy Sea and Surf Conditions
ű Capacity: 25 Men (including crew)
ű Crew: 4 Men/Women
ű Length (overall): 44’– 1 ˝”
ű Beam (over fenders): 12’– 8”
ű Draft (normal): 3’– 2”
ű Full Load Displacement including: 39,500 lbs.
Outfit: 1,500 lbs.
Fuel: 2,400 lbs.
and 25 Men
ű Normal Operating Displacement: 35,360 lbs.
ű Hoisting Weight: 34,865 lbs.
ű Shipping Weight: 32,465 lbs.
ű Hoisted by: Sling
ű Construction: Round Bottom – Steel
ű Speed (maximum): 14 knots (G.M.)
ű Fuel Capacity: 330 Gallons
ű Range (At full capacity): 150 Nautical Miles
ű Power Plant: Two (2) GM 6V53 diesel engines (@ 185hp @2800 rpm)
ű Electrical System: 24-Volt DC
ű Propellers: Two (2) 30"d x 25"p x 2" bore
ű Fire pump


Original cost in 1965..........$125,000
So much for inflation! Today it would cost over $500,000 to reproduce.

[Jeff Higgins]

I supose that no matter how well armed one may be, hesitation and indecision - "is this really happening?!?" or "what the hell is happening?!?" gives the advantage to the attacker. And if the attacker really doesn't care if he sees tomorrow or not...

[RWebb]

are those things steel, Al, or FG hulled?

the material makes a big difference to picking up the radar signal

cf. the piracy thread... now, here you'd have a different kettle of fish in terms of splatting their port re collateral damage

an attack by Iranian craft on a US ship would be a clear act of war - and you have a state actor involved; with the pirates you don't have that

[RoninLB]

Originally Posted by kach22i

There is a reason the US Navy destroyed all of our PT Boats after WWII, didn't want anyone else to get a hold of them.

there was a PT boat converted to civilian I would see in the channel when I was a little kid.

[1967 R50/2]

Would make a nice rum-runner.

[Milu]

Originally Posted by 1967 R50/2

Would make a nice rum-runner.

Film already out



http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048611/

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I dunno about that - Mark 48s are pretty damn quick. 55-60 knots. And I'm sure we have supercavitating torpedoes similar to the Shikval Russian model (200+ knots) that nobody talks about...

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by RoninLB

there was a PT boat converted to civilian I would see in the channel when I was a little kid.

Rare, most were scuttled on reefs and burned. South American countries wanted them bad, I've read.

I would not want to fuel bill of feeding three Merlins on a 80 foot boat.

Monday, September 24, 2007
Iran's Swarm Attack Tactics in the Strait of Hormuz
http://www.eaglespeak.us/2007/09/irans-swarm-attack-tactics-in-strait-of.html

You might have missed this article on Iran's 1000 boat "swarm force" stationed near the Strait of Hormuz...:

The U.S. Navy has determined that Iran has amassed a fleet of fast patrol boats in the 43-kilometer straits. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, responsible for strategic programs, leads the effort.

Three U.S. Navy Ships Approached by Iranian Boats
http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=34207

Story Number: NNS080107-05
Release Date: 1/7/2008 11:41:00 AM
Top News Story - Editors should consider using these stories first in local publications.
Watch Video

From Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/Commander, U.S. 5th Fleet Public Affairs

BAHRAIN (NNS) -- Following a routine transit through the Strait of Hormuz, Jan. 6, three U.S. Navy ships operating in international waters in the Persian Gulf were approached by five Iranian small boats that demonstrated irresponsible confrontational behavior near the U.S. ships.

U.S. Navy ships USS Port Royal (CG 73), USS Hopper (DDG 70) and USS Ingraham (FFG 61) were steaming in formation at approximately 8 a.m. as they finished a routine Strait of Hormuz transit when five boats, suspected to be from the Islamic Republic of Iran Revolutionary Guard Navy (IRGCN), maneuvered aggressively in close proximity of the Hopper. Following standard procedure, Hopper issued warnings, attempted to establish communications with the small boats and conducted evasive maneuvering.

Coalition vessels, including U.S. Navy ships, routinely operate in the vicinity of both Islamic Republic of Iran Navy and IRGCN vessels and aircraft. These interactions are always correct on the U.S. part and reflect a commitment to accepted tenets of international law and common practice.

For more news from Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/Commander, U.S. 5th Fleet, visit www.navy.mil/local/cusnc/.