View Full Version : "Iran Unveils Squadrons of Flying Boats"
Smaland
09-29-2010, 02:41 AM
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat.afp.gi.jpg
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat2.afp.g.jpg
The craft, dubbed the Bavar 2, is armed with a machine gun and carries surveillance cameras, according to a report from the Iranian Student News Agency.
Iran: boats have stealth (radar evasion) capability (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/28/iran-unveils-squadrons-of-flying-boats/)
SwordoftheVistula
09-30-2010, 04:45 AM
Even more fun, they can pack it full of explosives and stick a suicide bomber inside as a pilot. Kamikaze 2.0
Óttar
09-30-2010, 04:54 AM
One wonders why the f**k there are so many Iranians complicit with their present government. Why the f**k are they complicit with these self-righteous bearded fu**s who babble in a language they barely understand?! (Zaban-e Arabi)
Shahanshah Koroush Zendebad, Shir o Khorshid-e Iranzamin!
Long live the King of Kings! (Reza Pahlavi, the Manifestation of King Cyrus, Lion and Sun of the land of the Arya.)
RoyBatty
09-30-2010, 06:23 AM
One could easily rewrite these criticisms of Iran to something a bit closer to home.
One wonders why the f**k there are so many Yankz complicit with their present government. Why the f**k are they complicit with these self-righteous bearded fu**s who babble in a language (Zionazi Newspeak) which they barely understand?!
Long live the King of Kings! (Reza Pahlavi, the Manifestation of King Cyrus, Lion and Sun of the land of the Arya.)
Come again? A US / UK sponsored dictatorship installed in power in Iran by US / UK Coup? Yeah right..... wonder why they don't want them back. :D
The Ripper
09-30-2010, 07:44 AM
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat.afp.gi.jpg
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat2.afp.g.jpg
Iran: boats have stealth (radar evasion) capability (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/28/iran-unveils-squadrons-of-flying-boats/)
Those things look awesome. I want one.
Murphy
09-30-2010, 09:35 AM
LOL@Thispapistbeingforcedtocheerforthemohammedanbe causethewesternworldissofail.
Psychonaut
09-30-2010, 09:40 AM
Iran: boats have stealth (radar evasion) capability
WTF, are they just blatantly lying about this?
I always thought it was (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology) "now known that propellers and jet turbine blades produce a bright radar image." NASA recently did develop a super fancy prop plane that somehow avoids this, but this Iranian thing is probably not employing something that we just developed.
SwordoftheVistula
10-01-2010, 02:51 AM
One wonders why the f**k there are so many complicit with these self-righteousfu**s who babble in a language they barely understand?!
Oh, like all the people held in thrall to the latin church for so many years, much of which time period they gave the services in latin?
Tyrrhenoi
10-01-2010, 03:08 AM
LoL those things look heavy and not-manouvrable - I wouldn't worry about those things. :D
Iran has american made F-14's - and those things are deadly!
And they were overhauled in 2008!
http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/iranian-f-14a-tomcat-2.bmp
http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=15581
http://www.military-quotes.com/media/data/517/F-14A-IIAF.jpg
GRThVHE_2og
SwordoftheVistula
10-01-2010, 03:10 AM
Iran has american made F-14's - and those things are deadly!
They don't have spare parts for them though, so most of them don't work anymore. Also the ones they have are from the 70s, decades out of date.
Tyrrhenoi
10-01-2010, 03:21 AM
They don't have spare parts for them though, so most of them don't work anymore. Also the ones they have are from the 70s, decades out of date.
Yeah - I heard that story, they have the know-how for a nuclear program - but they can't upkeep their fighters? I also heard that the U.S. did not deliver an advaced radar system on those F-14's.
I just think those F-14 are more threatening, than those kanoo-planes! :D
Óttar
10-01-2010, 03:56 AM
Come again? A US / UK sponsored dictatorship installed in power in Iran by US / UK Coup? Yeah right..... wonder why they don't want them back.
:rolleyes2:
He paid Iranian citizens money if they gave their kids pre-Islamic Persian names (the present government does the same for people who give their kids Hammie names.) The Shah made his coronation look like the coronation of the ancient king Cyrus in the ancient Persian capital of Persepolis. He changed his last name to Pahlavi, the name of the pre-Islamic middle Persian script. He instilled in Persians pride in their ancient glorious pre-Islamic roots.
He was overthrown by a bunch of Marxist Champagne Socialists and Limousine Liberals who got screwed over in the end by the radical Muslim faction in their coalition. They deserve what they got, the stupes! Now I bet they pray for the days of the Shah to come back.
The Shah was full of copious amounts of win, and the greatest thing to ever happen in the modern history of his country. The overthrow of the Shah is the single most tragic event of the 20th century.
http://www.military-quotes.com/media/data/517/F-14A-IIAF.jpg
:sherlock: Is that a watermark of the Shah's seal (Shir o Khorshid, "Lion and Sun") on the white background? :D
Tyrrhenoi
10-01-2010, 04:26 AM
:rolleyes2:
:sherlock: Is that a watermark of the Shah's seal (Shir o Khorshid, "Lion and Sun") on the white background? :D
Yeah - I guess they DO pray for the Shah to come back.
:thumb001:
Groenewolf
10-01-2010, 05:16 PM
Óttar, can I presume you are already familiar with this website (http://www.activistchat.com/)?
RoyBatty
10-01-2010, 05:26 PM
Yeah - I guess they DO pray for the Shah to come back.
:thumb001:
All together now... Iranians all want the Shah back & to be ruled by Yank / Jewish puppets lol!!!! :D :thumb001:
Sol Invictus
10-01-2010, 05:29 PM
Iranians want the Shah back!!
RoyBatty
10-01-2010, 05:30 PM
They don't have spare parts for them though, so most of them don't work anymore. Also the ones they have are from the 70s, decades out of date.
Iran is fairly industrialised. It's not really all that difficult to reverse engineer the parts and make your own, particularly if you already have a reasonable scitech base.
The original avionics and weapons / radar systems (assuming that's what they still have) would obviously be quite out of date. Who knows... they may have upgraded / replaced these at some point.
Either way, I doubt that the US or Israel are quaking in their boots. Besides, the US Airforce tends to operate under conditions where the odds are rigged in their favour. It's not like they're going to go out there for fighter-on-fighter duels.
That's what AWACS and attacking beyond visual range is for. Dogfights are for the plebians.
Óttar
10-01-2010, 07:28 PM
Óttar, can I presume you are already familiar with this website?
I am aware of Democracy for Iran's website and similar projects.
All together now... Iranians all want the Shah back & to be ruled by Yank / Jewish puppets lol!!!!
Like I said, the people who overthrew the Shah were idiots. Better to be ruled by a Persianist Nationalist Romantic who believes in wealth and modernisation than a bunch of unlettered wannabe Arab mullahs.
Trendy Yank hating wankers snappin' they fangas, supportin' da Islamic republic, dats da new move! :rolleyes:
Are you really claiming:
This ugly stinking rat faced son of a bitch
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_bBlNFyLU7Ik/TD3nFotV7RI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/UIYZxZjO6FE/s1600/Ayatollah-Khomeini.jpg
>
Refined, cultured, spoke fluent German and French, nationalist, Romantic who supported the memory of ancient Persia?
http://persepolis.free.fr/iran/history/images/shah_uniform.jpg
http://s3.amazonaws.com/findagrave/photos/2001/222/pahlavimohammad.jpg
The Shah's inherent superiority is clear. He was going to make his land a powerhouse among nations.
RoyBatty
10-01-2010, 07:30 PM
You just hate freedom and the Iranian way of life
Óttar
10-01-2010, 07:39 PM
You just hate freedom and the Iranian way of life
:rolleyes:
http://trcs.wikispaces.com/file/view/cyrus.jpg/39197676/cyrus.jpg
http://www.irantravelingcenter.com/iran_shiraz_travel_hafez.jpg
>
http://www.johncoxart.com/CARI.Ahmadinejad.gif
http://www.pointofresistance.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/ayatollah-ali-khamenei.jpg
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:rhdyBaq7XMMraM:http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y164/wteach/more%20more/Iranian_woman.jpg&t=1
http://logisticsmonster.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/IranianWomanStoned.jpg
SwordoftheVistula
10-02-2010, 04:04 AM
The Iraqi air force had similar planes only newer and more up to date at the time, and yet got completely wiped, so I don't think the Iranian F-14s are much of any menace. As far as conventional weapons go, no country except maybe China can even compete with the US, so that's why they have to make all these little boats and such for sneak attacks, laying mines, and so on, 'asymmetrical warfare' they call it.
Óttar
10-02-2010, 04:52 AM
We'd wipe 'em out in 2 days. Keep running your mouth about your out of date USSR loaned Mig fighter jets. Hammies ain't shit.
Seriously though, to topple Iran's present regime, not a single shot need be fired. We just space out too much, or something. We're too busy talking shit about stimulus packages.
We took our money off the gold standard, it's all paper now anyhow.
Psychonaut
10-02-2010, 12:32 PM
The Iraqi air force had similar planes only newer and more up to date at the time, and yet got completely wiped, so I don't think the Iranian F-14s are much of any menace. As far as conventional weapons go, no country except maybe China can even compete with the US, so that's why they have to make all these little boats and such for sneak attacks, laying mines, and so on, 'asymmetrical warfare' they call it.
Indeed. China is the only nation that can even begin to compete with our military technology in both level of advancement and scale. Many European countries, Saudi Arabia and Israel have top level technology, but they've not nearly enough of it to be a credible threat. The North Koreans exceed us in scale, but they're as backwards as could possibly be and can't even feed their troops. Only China is mighty enough to find the middle ground here.
Agrippa
10-02-2010, 03:17 PM
Only China is mighty enough to find the middle ground here.
Never underestimate Russia. Russia is still far ahead of China, this might change in the future, but not up to this date.
Tyrrhenoi
10-02-2010, 03:51 PM
Many European countries, Saudi Arabia and Israel have top level technology, but they've not nearly enough of it to be a credible threat.
In the short term, the gap with the United States simply high: the Chinese-Red Army technology is twenty years behind the U.S. forces, defense experts estimate... China has about 3 mil. soldiers, a milion of those are paramilitay or reserves - the quality of equipment and ability of those troops are much lower than the standard of U.S. troops.
IF the european armies are considered as ONE - They should be second on this list -
According to the CIA and other Intelligence Services (European, Asian, African) this is the tally - based on a Combination of Manpower, Technology, Firepower, Training, Resources, Available Reserves, and Nuclear Potential (Current or Likely):
1. USA
2. China
3. Germany
4. India
5. France
6. Russia
7. UK
8. Italy
9. Israel
10. Pakistan
http://www.militair.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=3373
Agrippa
10-03-2010, 05:10 PM
I don't believe in this list.
It's rather a list for the future if all those nations would try to be the greatest military power.
Today, Germany f.e., is nothing and Russia comes definitely second after the US of A, but of course, one can estimate things in many different ways, I just don't think that this is the most realistic one...
Vasconcelos
10-03-2010, 05:25 PM
Yes, steath with a propeller. I bet that works great lol
RoyBatty
10-03-2010, 05:28 PM
I agree with Agrippa. Despite the fact that Russia went into near terminal decline in the 1990's they still have a fairly solid scientific base, particularly in weapons systems and space related fields. They obviously don't have the budget or scale for weapons projects that the US has but they can and do achieve a lot more on a fraction of the budget. Their weapons systems are still a credible threat, otherwise NATO would have attacked them long ago.
As for the Chinese, they may be behind but they are modernising fast. Military expenditure also doesn't necessarily equate into military capabilities. In China's case they can spend a fraction of what NATO countries spend yet achieve much more due to their low-cost labour and manufacturing capabilities. No doubt many of their systems aren't as good but they are hardly obsolete either. What one lacks in the latest high-tech you can easily make up for in numbers.
Another factor to keep in mind is that much of the USA's capabilities are based on fancy "smart" weapons which are frequently engaged against Third World no-hopers. These weapons and wars create the impression that the US is "untouchable" because of their apparent equipment advantages.
My take on this is that if the US were to tangle with a credible opponent as opposed to the backward Bananastans they prefer to mess with, things may be different. It only takes a few strikes to destroy orbiting space platforms after which GPS and weapons guidance (in the case of weapons which rely on it) are gone, the ability to control drones are gone, much of comms are gone etc.
In such a scenario the playing fields will become more level and the war will regress into a slogging match assuming no nukes are used. Whoever can afford to lose the most troops and equipment will win. Fancy weaponry capabilities will count for much less under these circumstances.
Agrippa
10-03-2010, 06:55 PM
I'm sure the USA would use nuclear weapons though and so far only Russia could really retaliate for that on an at least comparable scale.
Or an alliance of other states, no single other one imo, especially if the protective technologies will be more advanced then, what I would guess...
Curtis24
10-03-2010, 07:19 PM
Russia has serious problems trying to stop minority ethnic groups from seceding, combined with the declining population of their own nationals. Not to mention, the U.S. wishes Russia to become a failed state so that our corporations can exploit their resources. Russia will probably spend the next two or more generations trying to deal with this, if after that time they have maintained national sovereignty and not become an "economic sphere" ruled by Western corporations, then they will probably begin a rise to power. I don't really see Russia becoming a "superpower" though until at least 2080-2100, but if they survive they will be a regional power certainly.
Actually, Japan could easily become a superpower, if they decided to re-militarize... Unfortunately, it seems as if Turkey may also become a superpower.
I don't foresee any power using nuclear weapons, tactical or otherwise.
I agree with Agrippa. Despite the fact that Russia went into near terminal decline in the 1990's they still have a fairly solid scientific base, particularly in weapons systems and space related fields. They obviously don't have the budget or scale for weapons projects that the US has but they can and do achieve a lot more on a fraction of the budget. Their weapons systems are still a credible threat, otherwise NATO would have attacked them long ago.
What? Why would NATO attack Russia? NATO was created for defensive purposes.Although, Americans starting wars in the Middle-East is a bad exception. NATO was created to defend independent Western countries from Soviet expansionism. Now when the Soviet Union has collapsed, NATO has a new purpose. To defend the newly independent and re-independent countries from Russian expansionism/imperialism.
What would they use these flying boats for? Coastal defense? Reconnaissance? It has cameras and a light armament, so my guess is for recon missions around Iran's coasts.
Germanicus
10-03-2010, 08:50 PM
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat.afp.gi.jpg
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat2.afp.g.jpg
Iran: boats have stealth (radar evasion) capability (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/28/iran-unveils-squadrons-of-flying-boats/)
Shooting these out of the air/water would be like taking candy off kids.:)
Smaland
10-03-2010, 09:45 PM
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat.afp.gi.jpg
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/28/c1main.iran.fly.boat2.afp.g.jpg
During World War II, U.S. Navy ships used 20mm and 40mm cannon for close-in air defense. These craft are surely slow enough that these defensive weapons would be useful, if we still had them.
RoyBatty
10-03-2010, 09:50 PM
What? Why would NATO attack Russia? NATO was created for defensive purposes.
I'm not trying to be offensive but are you for real or just stupid? :D :p
Although, Americans starting wars in the Middle-East is a bad exception.
More hilarity ensues.... sigh
NATO was created to defend independent Western countries from Soviet expansionism. Now when the Soviet Union has collapsed, NATO has a new purpose. To defend the newly independent and re-independent countries from Russian expansionism/imperialism.
God.... please.... perhaps you should stick to Estonian spam and rather not embarrass yourself by sharing your knowledge of geopolitics with us. Honestly.... this is one of the most pitiful posts I've read in weeks. :(
Groenewolf
10-03-2010, 09:52 PM
Now when the Soviet Union has collapsed, NATO has a new purpose.
The only time NATO came into action was to attack Serbia who where successfully fighting back against Albanian terrorists. I think that somewhere earlier it was mentioned that NATO did not come into action when France was in armed conflict with Morocco, not even the treat of armed intervention was issued. This was not the case after 9/11 for some reason.
RoyBatty
10-03-2010, 09:52 PM
What would they use these flying boats for? Coastal defense? Reconnaissance? It has cameras and a light armament, so my guess is for recon missions around Iran's coasts.
I was thinking the same thing, possibly coastal recon patrol planes. Can't see from the photos how they could be armed.
I was thinking the same thing, possibly coastal recon patrol planes. Can't see from the photos how they could be armed.
They're definitely short-range craft, not like the big, long-range flying boats that the U.S. used during the Pacific War with Japan in the 1940s. Maybe a range of a couple of hundred miles? I wonder if they're intended for, say, sub-hunting or ship-hunting? I can easily see those things with, say, a torpedo or a depth charge on them as a refit.
SwordoftheVistula
10-04-2010, 07:31 AM
Russia comes definitely second after the US of A,
I agree with Agrippa. Despite the fact that Russia went into near terminal decline in the 1990's they still have a fairly solid scientific base, particularly in weapons systems and space related fields.
Compared to China? China has at least as good technology in non-nuclear areas, and much greater production capacity, size, and economy. Russia has better size than any other European power, but that's not saying much.
As to what these planes will be used for: mine laying, and I really wasn't kidding about the kamikaze attacks :cool:
Agrippa
10-04-2010, 10:20 AM
Just some years ago China needed Russian experts to control their jets for the parade!
They are really just into copying what Russia has long ago - they will produce more of it, sooner or later they MIGHT be far ahead by themselves, but seriously, that will need a lot of time still - the creative-technological potential of China is, let's say it blunt, highly overrated SO FAR.
Even with all the European-Western technology they got so far, they are far behind in many respects, just in the foreground they seem to have closed the gap and they have a tremendous speed, if looking at where they started.
But to say when they will have a real advantage in this or that field of conventional and nuclear warfare is hard to tell, so far I see no reason to underrate Russia in comparison, in fact, Russia is still the only realistic threat for the complete existence of the USA and all its people in a total war.
RoyBatty
10-04-2010, 05:42 PM
They're definitely short-range craft, not like the big, long-range flying boats that the U.S. used during the Pacific War with Japan in the 1940s. Maybe a range of a couple of hundred miles? I wonder if they're intended for, say, sub-hunting or ship-hunting? I can easily see those things with, say, a torpedo or a depth charge on them as a refit.
They are pretty small and sit low in the water. I couldn't figure out where a torpedo could be mounted. The photos aren't clear but it didn't look like the wings had hardpoints nor enough space or clearance.
As for depth charges, that Iranian plane doesn't appear to have the space to store them (one would need multiple charges, one won't be enough) nor the power to carry such a heavy load. Those WW2 flying boats were pretty big. I visited the RAF museum in Hendon some weeks ago where they had a Sutherland Flying Boat which could be fitted with smallish depth charges. It's a big beastie.
lIcltyMwJRg
RoyBatty
10-04-2010, 05:56 PM
Compared to China? China has at least as good technology in non-nuclear areas, and much greater production capacity, size, and economy.
China's Scitech base isn't as advanced as Russia's, at least not yet. Their entire Space Program is a direct clone of the Soviet one. Their most advanced domestically produced fighter planes are Sukhoi clones. Much of their civilian nuclear tech is based on Russian systems.
I'm not saying the Chinese are backward but they have some way to go before they'll surpass Russia in these fields. I don't believe that it will necessarily take them very long to catch up to and perhaps surpass Russia and the US but right now they are behind.
Russia has better size than any other European power, but that's not saying much.
Better size what? The Soviet / Russian industrial machine went to the dogs after the Soviet Union collapsed. Germany will surely have a much larger overall scitech base than Russia but Russia has the advantage in certain niche fields like hitech weaponry and Space technology.
As to what these planes will be used for: mine laying, and I really wasn't kidding about the kamikaze attacks :cool:
Those little planes don't look like they can carry much weight apart from the pilot and fuel. I don't see how they could really be fitted with mines or torpedos or carry the weight for that matter. As a Kamikaze weapon against an armed target they'd be useless. Too slow and not nearly nimble enough.
Besides, the Iranians have much better anti-ship weapons. Hezbollah illustrated that when they employed one (presumably sourced from Iran or Syria) against the Zionist aggressor during the recent Lebanese war.
http://defensetech.org/2006/07/19/hezbollahs-surprise-weapons/
They are pretty small and sit low in the water. I couldn't figure out where a torpedo could be mounted. The photos aren't clear but it didn't look like the wings had hardpoints nor enough space or clearance.
As for depth charges, that Iranian plane doesn't appear to have the space to store them (one would need multiple charges, one won't be enough) nor the power to carry such a heavy load. Those WW2 flying boats were pretty big. I visited the RAF museum in Hendon some weeks ago where they had a Sutherland Flying Boat which could be fitted with smallish depth charges. It's a big beastie.
lIcltyMwJRg
If not sub detection or sub-hunting, maybe coastal recon? The MG would keep most minor foes at bay, at least as minimal defense.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.