Iran Dispatches Fleet of Warships to Gulf of Aden

[tocqueville]

Source: Fars News Agency

TEHRAN (FNA)- Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari announced on Monday that Iran has sent 6 warships and logistic vessels to the Gulf of Aden and the surrounding international waters.

Sayyari, who made the remarks while visiting the development projects and installations of the Iranian Navy here in Tehran, described the measure as "unprecedented in the history of the Iranian Navy", and added, "This important move indicates the country's high military capability in confronting any kind of foreign threat along the coasts of the country."

He expressed hope that the Iranian Navy experts and specialists would continue daily progress in all fields of surface and sub-surface and arms technology and production.
.......
In addition to safeguarding the Iranian ships and ships that are in a way related to Iran, the Iranian warships would assist any other foreign ship that would seek assistance against the pirates, and help Somalia government in its combat against piracy.

Read more: http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8803041498

---

the frigate Alborz will be followed by a tanker of the Bander Abbas class



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_frigate_Alborz



Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari

[LakeSamish706]

1. Well thats a step in the right direction, good for them.. n/t

[cboy4]

2. I'm sure they'll use it as an excuse to

"accidentally" fire off a missile or two at Israel. :eyes:

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[snappyturtle]

5. You aren't serious, are you? nt

[cboy4]

8. No wonder Kool Aid stock prices remain steady.

Iran President calls Israel a "Rotting Corpse"

by AYATOLLAH @ Thursday, 08. May, 2008 – 14:22:37

Hardline Iranian President labelled Israel a "rotting corpse" that will soon be buried.

http://ayatollah.blog.co.uk/2008/05/08/iran-ppresident-calls-israel-a-rotting-c-4148107/

[tocqueville]

7. look at a map, ridiculous claim

they would have to get into the Mediterranean first

they don't have the technology to do that from that distance, even if they had cruise missiles. Not even the US could do that (max range 1000 km, Aden is roughly 2300 km from Israel.

[Titonwan]

18. What that stand for? Conservativeboy4?

When did neoconservative views become du rigeur here? You a Israeli firster? We wouldn't be in half the shit we're in if it wasn't for their arrogance. To hell with Israel.

[cboy4]

30. Listen to Mr. 200 posts lecture me about being a neocon.

I'll tell you this, if your nut ball Iranian leader -- who you seemingly adore -- stopped threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, we wouldn't be in half the shit we're in right now.

Yea, Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. :rofl:

Give me a break.

[bushmeister0]

31. If it walks like a duck . . . Israeli Foriegn Ministry calling?

You always have to wonder how these rabid Israel supporters always seem to jump on anything the least bit critical of Israel so quickly.

Timeonline

"The (Israeli)Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages.

In the past week nearly 5,000 members of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) have downloaded special 'megaphone' software that alerts them to anti-Israeli chatrooms or internet polls to enable them to post contrary viewpoints . . ."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article693911.ece

[FarCenter]

19. It's 1250 miles from Aden to Elat, only 1000 miles from Tehran to Tel Aviv

So going to the Gulf of Aden is actually heading away from Israel.

[Igel]

23. What?

You think a little side detour up the Gulf of Aqaba is impossible?

(No, I don't think Iran'll fire a missile at Israel. My point's just that there's an easier way to get a boat to Israel than having it go to the Mediterranean.)

[ohio2007]

26. Israel has a navy base and port on the Red Sea anyway so the Med is moot

it's not to far for them to reach the gulf of Aden either and remember this story ?

'Iranian Arms Ship Destroyed Near Sudan'

Sunday, 26 April 2009

An Iranian vessel, en route to Sudan in order to deliver weapons to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, was attacked by an Israeli or American ship and destroyed, according to a report Sunday in the Egyptian weekly Al-Usbua.The report quoted sources in Khartoum as saying that all of the crew-members who were on board were killed in the incident, which occurred in the past two weeks.

"The ship was destroyed at sea near the Sudanese coast," the sources said, adding that the vessel's cargo was to be led through the Sudanese desert and the Sinai Peninsula.

Iran had attempted news of the incident be kept under wraps, the sources said. RELATED'IAF planes bombed Gaza-bound weapons convoy'Strike reportedly obliterates Iranian ship at seaSecurity analyst: 'Sudan strike told Hamas, Iran: Your smuggling route is exposed'
snip


http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/74266/-iranian-arms-ship-destroyed-near-sudan-.html

Both sides know what they are doing...
and why they are doing it.

snip
"There were indeed two strikes in Sudan, in January and February," Sudan's deputy transportation minister told Channel 10 on Thursday evening. "I cannot confirm that Israel or the US were behind the attack, but I know that the US controls the airspace there," he said.

"The second strike was against a ship at sea and it was completely destroyed," another Sudanese official said.


snip
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1237727547715&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

So
always remember;
When comming about and going face to face ;

Smile and wave boys,
smile and wave. ....

it's just a game



:popcorn:
play nice. It's all about controlling pirates

[happyslug]

32. Why? Iran itself is closer to Israel then Aden,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gulf_of_Aden_map.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Aden

The Gulf of Aden is 2000 Kilometers from Israel, Iran itself is only 1200 Kilometers. Why go 2400 Kilometers to launch a missile that has to travel 2000 miles, when you can avoid the whose mess by launching a missile directly? You can NOT hide who launch the missile if you launch it from one of your own ships. Paranoia has its place, but not in a move of the Iranian Navy to the Gulf of Aden as to Israel.

http://encarta.msn.com/map_701512823/gulf_of_aden.html

[ohio2007]

34. but wouldn't that missile have to fly over extensive layers of radar detection from Iraq to Tel Aviv

It would be to obvious "who done it" but with an Iranian navy running convoy cover for some of its own ships in that narrow part of an approach to the canal.Accidents can lead to incidents.It probably won't happen.,most likely won't happen but it is on record that
Iran has an odd pattern of reflagging their own merchant ships in mid voyage.

Why is that ?

[happyslug]

35. And so is the entire Red Sea and the Arabian Peninsula

There are NO "dead spots" in regards to Radar in the entire Middle East. Both Egyptian and Saudi Radar covers the Gulf, and Israel has radar Covering the Northern part of the Red Sea. The chief reason for this is both Egypt and Saudi Arabia (as while as Israel) wants to avoid what happen in the Six Days War in 1967, where Israel flew its planes close to Turkey and Greece to Avoid Egyptian and Libyan Radars, and then attack Egypt Air Bases via Libyan Air Space. I would NOT be surprise that Israel runs air borne radar down the length of the Red Sea to make sure such an attack never hits Israel. Egypt learned it lesson in 1967 and has radar coverage of not only Israel but the Surrounding Countries and Seas (The same for Saudi Arabia).

The Red Sea is no more then 221 miles wide, and narrows as it gets near Israel. Modern Radar can cover that distance WITHOUT being Airborne. The US still runs the Airborne Radar of Saudi Arabia (Through paid for by Saudi Arabia). Thus coverage is more complete and overlapping (Even if you ignore the Airborne parts of the Radar System). Thus any missile flying on the Red Sea will be known to Egypt and Saudi Arabia within seconds (And if a US Ships is in the Red Sea, so will the US).

My point is no matter HOW Iran would launch a missile, it will be covered by Radar within seconds of being launched. No one may be able to stop it before the Missile hits something, but it will be detected NO matter where it came from. Given that where the Missile came from will be known within minutes of it being launched, the fact it is launched from the Gulf of Aden or Iran itself is a moot point. Everyone will know who launched it no matter where it is launched from, thus no advantage to attacking from the Red Sea

[ohio2007]

36. My point is they are not looking to launch at a fixed land point

but looking for a direct surface action incident.



thats what the ass end is all about



they are going to play a Cold War game if they choose enter the international waters of the Red Sea.

You think otherwise ?

[happyslug]

37. Get in a fight with the Israeli Navy, in an area outside the range of Their Own Planes?

No one expects to do Naval Operation without Air Cover. In the case of most of the World that means land based Air Cover. The US Navy has Carriers (As so France and Britain) which can be used to provide cover for Ships on the High Seas (Russia, India and even Brazil also have Carriers but those tend to be to provide Air Cover to areas just outside the range of land based planes OR for special operations outside the range of land based planes).

The Iranian movement into the Gulf of Aden is to show how far these ships can go, NOT to engage anyone who has any form of Air Support (Israel has the planes And the airborne tankers to provide such cover for the whole length of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden IF ISRAEL WANTED TO. This is more a show the Flag mission then any threat to anyone.

As to going into International Water, ANYONE can do that, the US Navy does it all the time. Most times it means nothing more then we can project power into that part of the world. I suspect that is all the Iranians are doing, showing they can project power throughout the Northern part of the Arabian Sea. Thus it is more a movement to show the US that Iran can threaten US Carriers even in the Arabian sea, then anything against Israel. This threat is not much, Iran is showing it can do SOMETHING more then just stand still if attacked, it can force the US Navy to keep its Carriers further from the Persian Gulf then it does so now. If any attack occurs (And I doubt it till do to the fact it would lead to a massive US counterstrike that Iran does NOT want) it would be against the US Carriers. As I said already, I do NOT expect such an attack, but the US Navy has to consider the risks of such an attack and set its Carriers accordingly. In fact the sole purpose of this mission maybe to force the US to keep its Carriers further from the Coasts then it has been (i.e. to Scare the US Navy that such an attack is possible so the Navy plans accordingly by keeping the Carriers further out to sea.

The US Navy is more on the mind of the Iranian Navy then any attack on Israel. I am just attacking the concept that this move to the Gulf of Aden by the Iranian Navy has something to do with Israel. I just do NOT see that to be the case. The US Navy is a different ballgame, but no direct attack will occur from the Iranian side given that all it will lead to is a massive defeat of the Iranian Navy. The Iranian Navy wants to avoid that, thus the best the Iranians can hope for is that the US Carriers be kept further out to sea then they have been kept.

[snappyturtle]

4. edit....wrong spot. nt

[UndertheOcean]

6. more dick waving n/t

[bemildred]

9. Correct. Election coming up and all that. nt

[tocqueville]

10. FOX calls it "saber rattling"...

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news/international/Iran_Sends_6_Warships_to_International_Waters_in_Saber_Rattling_Move_30852933

but according to VOA it's a response to a... US initiative...

http://www.voanews.com/uspolicy/2009-05-19-voa3.cfm

[ohio2007]

11. They must be tired of pirates sinking their ships

Well thats what has been under reported around the internet. Something must be in the "political statement" mix very soon. Seems the little president in Iran needs to give himself a big "boost" in the polls later next month....

lol

Like the mullahs haven't a clue as to who will be the last comic standing



"We think those who assume restoring nuclear weapons can have the upper hand in political equations are politically retarded," the president said.

Iran says nuclear weapons are "un-Islamic" and "developing, producing or stockpiling nuclear weapons are forbidden under the rule of Islam."

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/34/Nukes_politically_retarded_says_Ahmadinejad.html

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. The pirates are not allowed to touch Islamic ships

or so it was claimed when they hijacked them in the past.

Frigates are barely warships. Its not clear that the Iranian navy could manage them in a blue water environment

[tocqueville]

13. barely warships ?

Alborz

Class and type: Alvand (SAAM) class frigate
Vosper Mk 5
Displacement: 1,100 tons (1,540 tons full load)
Length: 94.5 m (310 ft)
Beam: 11.07 m (36 ft)
Draught: 3.25 m (10.5 ft)
Propulsion: 2 shafts, 2 Paxman Ventura cruising diesels, 3,800 bhp, 17 knots (31 km/h)
2 Rolls Royce Olympus TM-3A boost gas turbines, 46,000 shp, 39 knots (72 km/h)
Speed: 39 knots (72 km/h) max
Range: 5,000 nmi (9,000 km) at 15 knots (28 km/h)
Complement: 125-146
Armament:
4 x C-802 anti-ship missiles
1 × 4.5 inch (114 mm) Mark 8 gun
1 x twin 20 mm AAA, 2 x single 20 mm AAA
2 × 81 mm mortars
2 × 0.50cal machine guns
1 x Limbo ASW mortar
2 x triple 12.75 in torpedo tubes

they have two others in the same class

missiles :

The Yingji-82 or YJ-82 (Chinese: 鹰击-82, literally "Eagle Strike"; NATO reporting name: CSS-N-8 Saccade) is a Chinese anti-ship missile first unveiled in 1989 by the China Haiying Electro-Mechanical Technology Academy (CHETA), also known as the Third Academy. Due to the Yingji-82 missile's small radar reflectivity, low attack flight path (only five to seven meters above the sea surface) and strong anti-jamming capability of its guidance equipment, target ships have a very small chance of intercepting the missile. The single shot hit probability of the Yingji-82 is estimated to be as high as 98%.<1> The Yingji-82 can be launched from airplanes, surface ships, submarines and land-based vehicles. Its export name is the C-802.

Operational
range ~500 km (C-805); 350+ km (C-803); 180 km (C-802A); 120 km (C-802)<1>
Flight altitude 3-5 m (attacking); 5-7 m (cruising)<1>
Speed Mach 1.6 (attacking); Mach 0.9 (cruising) <1>

source wikipedia

good enough to sink skiffs...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. Indeed, they are about as small as warships come

And given the low level of training, its not clear if their crews could take them in to serious blue water

[tocqueville]

15. they have already been training

with the Indian Navy

besides the Gulf of Aden isn't very different from the Gulf of Oman regarding "serious blue water"....

and size isn't the issue here. Most of the EUNAVFOR ships are of the same class and even smaller, but fulfill their mission perfectly

[Kaleva]

17. Frigates are ideal for this type of work

[ohio2007]

24. What type of "work" are you saying they are ideal for ?

They'll be watching and will also be watched.
Watched from areas pirates do not originate from imo

Wonder how well they trained in below the waterline damage control. They may be sailing into harms way if their fearless president goes on sabre rattling rants during their sea periods in constricted water routes.

If they choose to sail into restricted areas.

jmo

[Oerdin]

16. Alvand class frigates are worthless.

They're a modification of a British design dating way back to the 1950's and this ship along with its two sister ships were all built in the 1960's. The Iranians used to have a fourth light frigate of the same class but in 1988 the Iranians decided to fire on a US A-6 which was escorting a Kuwaiting oil tanker (the Iranians were sinking all tankers in the gulf that they could to try to starve Iraq's oil exports) so the American plane returned fire and sank the Iranian ship. It's literally the best ship they have and it dates back to the 1950's. It's junk.

[tocqueville]

21. the non Hollywood-version

is the following

"On 14 April 1988, the American frigate USS Copeland, while on patrol, encountered trouble with its primary missile launcher. The Samuel B. Roberts, assuming Copeland's patrol area, struck an Iranian mine and was badly damaged. Four days later, U.S. forces retaliated with a one-day attack on Iranian warships, armed speedboats, and oil platforms used as naval bases. Dubbed Operation Praying Mantis, it was the biggest engagement of surface warships since World War II. Two Iranian ships were destroyed, and two American pilots died when their helicopter crashed."

but the Iranian ships were sunk by Harpoon missiles and laser guided bombs. Any ships of that class could be sunk which such weapons.
It doesn't mean they are "junk".

and

On 17 May (1986), an Iraqi warplane fired two Exocet missiles at the guided missile frigate USS Stark, killing 37 sailors and injuring 21. Iraqi officials said the targeting of the U.S. warship was accidental.

Besides the Roberts was nearly sunk by a mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Earnest_Will
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis

So it shows that a frigate (or a plane - even an "old" one) equipped with modern missiles can sink (exocet, silkworm etc...) a US ship or damage it badly. That's what's the Brits learned in the Falklands where they lost more valuable ships than the Argentinians did.

so I'd be very careful before completely dissing the Iranian Navy, specially if the attacks are done by surprise.

Anyway it's not likely it will happen, the Iranians just want to show off in this case.

[Arctic Dave]

25. I remember it well. USS Merrill :)

[ohio2007]

27. preying mantis

[Arctic Dave]

28. We popped off 5" shells at Iranian platforms.

We returned two years later, they were very skittish when they saw us.

[ohio2007]

29. The current Iranian admirals also remember the event

You can see skittishin their face


jmo
but they will act in a professional manner and carry out orders the mullahs cut them to undertake over the next several weeks leading up to the elections.

btw,
You see the thread about the French placing special units in plaine sight of Iran ? Obama signed off on this imo
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3892803
ie,
EU getting ready to show teeth in upcomming talks.
Small rapid deployment force for keeping the peace around those same platforms they launched from.... before taking those shells of yours.....

[proteus_lives]

20. If they are there to fight piracy, good.

If they cross a US group, lets hope for cool heads on both sides.

[Turbineguy]

22. There was a time

when the Iranians were staunch allies of the US. Maybe there's a renaissance incipient.

[ret5hd]

33. You mean when our puppet was in power?