PDA

View Full Version : Iran's Radar Stealthy flying boats



OBIO
September 28th, 2010, 22:47
No political views here...just in awe at these planes. About as steathy as bright pink Elephants. Armed with a machine gun and cameras. Nice looking flying boats...but stealthy...I don't think so.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/28/iran-unveils-squadrons-of-flying-boats/?iref=obinsite

OBIO

stiz
September 28th, 2010, 22:54
unless it flys under the rader?? in any case it looks like a fun little plane! :icon_lol:

Piglet
September 28th, 2010, 22:54
20094Just a copy of a Russian surface effect craft which in turn is similar to a German X-114 type craft

Ferry_vO
September 29th, 2010, 02:04
Yep, looks like other modern W.I.G. aircraft IMHO:

http://www.se-technology.com/wig/html/main.php?code=&craft=49&open=showcraft

hey_moe
September 29th, 2010, 02:12
Can you water ski behind it?

Aviator32
September 29th, 2010, 05:26
What is it they say? Insanity is the mother of invention.
Something like that anyway :engel016:

Bone
September 29th, 2010, 05:32
I saw these in Popular Mechanics a few years ago, except they weren't militarized. I guess someone in Iran saw the same issue...

Navy Chief
September 29th, 2010, 05:58
Ok, let's see. A fleet of those "stealthy flying boats" are flying towards a US ship, armed with Close In Weapons System (CIWS).

Can you say, "turkey shoot"?????:icon_lol:

airattackimages
September 29th, 2010, 06:05
You haven't seen anything yet. Beware Iran's newest combat aircraft still in development (they just received the kit via FedEx, it will probably take them a few months to build.) Behold the Shakira Jihad III, also known by it's civilian designation; the Rans S-6 Coyote. As an added benefit, they will receive their A&P cert once they finish production.

http://www.malcolmharris.flyer.co.uk/rans.jpg

It is the ultimate in stealth and lethality. It's radar absorbing materials (fabric) will help it to elude sophisticated radar systems. The only thing a radar system operator will see is a tube frame resembling a giant bicycle with a moped engine near the front, allowing it to get close and drop it's lethal payload of 4 hand grenades.

wombat666
September 29th, 2010, 07:00
Can you say, "turkey shoot"?????:icon_lol:

Just good old plain 'Skeet Shoot'.
:jump:

Dain Arns
September 29th, 2010, 07:00
Ok, let's see. A fleet of those "stealthy flying boats" are flying towards a US ship, armed with Close In Weapons System (CIWS).

Can you say, "turkey shoot"?????:icon_lol:

I too have my doubts that marine plywood will be able to deflect that bullet storm. :icon_lol:



What's next for them?
Iran obtains the classified plans for 'Shriner Jeeps'?


http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/Leorstef/TG004988.jpg

brad kaste
September 29th, 2010, 07:10
Kinda' cool looking. Reminiscent of certain types of WWI flying boats. Not too sure if I'd take on the USN in one. But maybe that's not what they were designed for. I'd lump them into the same category with the missile Iran displayed awhile ago.......:isadizzy:

centuryseries
September 29th, 2010, 11:05
All joking aside, Iran still flies F-14, and more than likely still has some Phoenix missiles/has remanufacted them. Got to be a bit of a concern since the US doesn't have any missiles like the Phoenix anymore!

WIG's look great, prefer bigger ones like the KM but any will do.

The old adage, 'never underestimate the enemy' comes to mind.

airattackimages
September 29th, 2010, 11:49
All joking aside, Iran still flies F-14, and more than likely still has some Phoenix missiles/has remanufacted them. Got to be a bit of a concern since the US doesn't have any missiles like the Phoenix anymore!

WIG's look great, prefer bigger ones like the KM but any will do.

The old adage, 'never underestimate the enemy' comes to mind.
They can only manage to get a handful of F-14s airborne at any one time, due to the fact that they only way they can get them flight ready is through cannibalization.

The threat of a remanufactured AIM-54 is real and has been tossed around for a while. They still to this day have not bragged that they had been able to remanufacture any however, which they seem to do whenever they have a success. Considering the AIM-54 is dated and no longer even used by our own military I don't think it's something to worry about. Also consider this; every time our own pilots used an AIM-54 in the past 15 years, they've all missed. Iranian F-14 drivers have considerably less routine training on the missile and likely wouldn't fare any better with it.

Allen
September 29th, 2010, 12:34
I wouldn't outrigt call them a joke. With other units and torpedo under each wing they could pose a large threat.

History has shown that superior numbers dose better than superior technology.

Dain Arns
September 29th, 2010, 12:46
No offense intended sir, but realistically they ain't going to get a torpedo under each wing on those particular models in the photos. ;)
If they make them much, much bigger, yes I would agree with that scenario, Allen.
A much bigger version would be a serious threat, not these kit planes.
Right now I suspect the machine gun and camera along with full fuel and pilot is putting those at about max take off weight.

hubbabubba
September 29th, 2010, 12:56
It would make for a great "chase sequence" in a future James Bond flick!:jump:

With a couple of their papier-maché cruise missiles blowing right and left of Bonds' Seadoo.:kilroy:

As for being stealthy, maybe in 1942...

Willy
September 29th, 2010, 12:58
I'm hesitant to consider any nation's military a joke. We considered the Japanese military a joke before Pearl Harbor and that's a piece of history that I'd rather not see repeated.

hubbabubba
September 29th, 2010, 13:27
I'm hesitant to consider any nation's military a joke. We considered the Japanese military a joke before Pearl Harbor and that's a piece of history that I'd rather not see repeated.

Good point Willy. But in 1942, American intelligence of Japan's military forces was next to nil. In Iran's case, they literally show us their stuff and, you must admit, it is laughable.

I would be more interested by what Iranians don't show us...:kilroy:

Bjoern
September 29th, 2010, 13:34
Ok, let's see. A fleet of those "stealthy flying boats" are flying towards a US ship, armed with Close In Weapons System (CIWS).

Can you say, "turkey shoot"?????:icon_lol:

Unless they're armed with an Exocet. Just ask the Royal Navy what one of those can do.


Also, I wouldn't underestimate Iran's aerospace industry. They can do a tad more than just license produce foreign designs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saeqeh_%28warplane%29
http://www.payvand.com/news/07/sep/1232.html

centuryseries
September 29th, 2010, 14:28
Good point Willy. But in 1942, American intelligence of Japan's military forces was next to nil. In Iran's case, they literally show us their stuff and, you must admit, it is laughable.

I would be more interested by what Iranians don't show us...:kilroy:

How many people would've thought the Taliban/Al Qaeda were inferior against the might of the US before 9/11 - it is proven and is continuing to be proven in Afghanistan that simple yet effective weapons and tactics are more than a match for the might of any modern military with it's advanced hardware which is all seemingly designed for a historical threat from Russia and a battle on the plains of Germany.

What I find interesting is that the Russians tried in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1988 before pulling out - what made the west think we have a better chance of defeating a moving enemy if the Soviets with their Cold War weaponary couldn't?! They hardly ever mention this in the news......

Before thinking those WIG craft are laughable, it's probably a good idea to read up on the kind of hazard the Iranian gun boats caused recently - simple yet effective fast moving weapons.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537199/

Emil Frand
September 29th, 2010, 14:52
"love child of a Jetski and a bumper car,"

http://news.aol.ca/us/article/experts-unimpressed-with-irans-new-flying-boats/19654425

Allen
September 29th, 2010, 15:04
Matt Gurney, writing at the National Post (http://%20fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/09/29/matt-gurney-iranian-kamikaze-boats-must-be-taken-seriously/), calls the new vehicles the "love child of a Jetski and a bumper car," and believes the boats are seemingly so useless that the only explanation is that Iran is planning to use them in suicide attacks on U.S. ships

I've seen this before...and it was not good.

airattackimages
September 29th, 2010, 16:47
History has shown that superior numbers dose better than superior technology.
Ancient history perhaps. Given a comparison of relevant military objectives in modern history the opposite has shown true many times.

Bone
September 29th, 2010, 17:06
I'm hesitant to consider any nation's military a joke. We considered the Japanese military a joke before Pearl Harbor and that's a piece of history that I'd rather not see repeated.

Have you been to Belize? No hesitation there at all...JOKE. Here's their Air Force:

Cessna 182 Skylane (http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/344811)
<SMALL>USA</SMALL>
Utility
182J
1
(may no longer be in service)
-----
<R>Britten-Norman Islander</R>
<SMALL>UK</SMALL>
Transport
Patrol
BN-2A
BN-2B-21
1
2

-----
<R>Slingsby T-67 Firefly</R>
<SMALL>UK</SMALL>
Trainer
T67M-260
1

hubbabubba
September 29th, 2010, 19:47
(...)
Before thinking those WIG craft are laughable, it's probably a good idea to read up on the kind of hazard the Iranian gun boats caused recently - simple yet effective fast moving weapons.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537199/

Frolicking with speedboats in peacetime is one thing, using "stealthy" ground-effect aircraft for suicide attacks is another. Many NATO and Warsaw Pact subs and surface ships scratched each others paint job during the cold war. The speedboats were seen on radar long before they started their "pissing contest" and, in wartime situation, would have been literally blown out of the water before being in visual contact. I would wage a three-dollar bill that their radar signature is way smaller than these latest contraptions.

Granted though that, in peace time, over calm sea, on a non-armed civil ship, they may have a chance to score a hit or two.

I'm much more concerned by a stack of half a dozen mines attached to a cell phone and buried by the side of the road. These don't need publicity.

This is more self-serving internal propaganda than a warning to "hostiles nations".

The second link given by Bjoern is quite revealing;

20176

I'm no expert, but this is not Farsi.

Tom Clayton
September 29th, 2010, 19:48
As stated, as long as the radar doesn't see all the way to ground/water level, they could, in a sense, be "steath" vehicles.

I love the video that includes the word "Soaring" in the title. The clip shows the obstacle-clearing hop that most small WIG's can pull off, but as I understand it, that's a short-lived "flight." Doesn't that type of craft loose nearly all lift when it leaves Ground Effect?

And do they not know how to put a fairing around an engine???

Bushpounder
September 29th, 2010, 20:21
I too have my doubts that marine plywood will be able to deflect that bullet storm. :icon_lol:



What's next for them?
Iran obtains the classified plans for 'Shriner Jeeps'?


http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b162/Leorstef/TG004988.jpg

Chief ..... I give those about .25 of a second with a mini-gun!

Dain ..... damn it! .... you owe me a keyboard!!!!! That is HILARIOUS!!!!!

Don

Bjoern
September 30th, 2010, 11:12
What I find interesting is that the Russians tried in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1988 before pulling out - what made the west think we have a better chance of defeating a moving enemy if the Soviets with their Cold War weaponary couldn't?! They hardly ever mention this in the news......

The Soviet Army made so many mistakes in Afghanistan I don't know where to start...




The second link given by Bjoern is quite revealing;

20176

I'm no expert, but this is not Farsi.

Those were F-5s before they underwent surgery, so english instructions on the fuselage aren't that surprising. Also the plane shown in the pics is clearly a demonstrator, so keeping stuff international for potentially interested foreigners isn't the worst move.

hubbabubba
October 1st, 2010, 04:02
(...)
Those were F-5s before they underwent surgery, so english instructions on the fuselage aren't that surprising. Also the plane shown in the pics is clearly a demonstrator, so keeping stuff international for potentially interested foreigners isn't the worst move.

You must admit that, coming from a "rogue state" that defies the international community and boots out UN observers, this is a bit funny.:engel016:

If they want to export, I think they would have an opening with their ground-effect aircraft, providing that they make it a two (or four?) seater. I would like one!:jump:

BTW- I'm not belittling Iran's military might, after all; they kept their ground against Irak, but this particular "show" in recent weeks of flimsy gadgets is pathetic.

Bjoern
October 1st, 2010, 08:52
You must admit that, coming from a "rogue state" that defies the international community and boots out UN observers, this is a bit funny.:engel016:

Who knows? *Shrugs*


BTW- I'm not belittling Iran's military might, after all; they kept their ground against Irak, but this particular "show" in recent weeks of flimsy gadgets is pathetic.

It's not about WHAT you show, it's about THAT you show it.
They designed and built these things in their country and that's what they want to show the world.