#1 2012-01-29 11:55:35
Iran's stealthy flying boats....
Not sure how the stealth bit works with that prop spinning around (not to mention the big ol' engine block stuck up there on a tower), but come on lets give them props for trying really hard.
Last edited by Emmeran (2012-01-29 11:56:07)
Offline
#2 2012-01-29 12:16:11
They are cute, aren't they? They look like something you might see roll out of the garage of your odd but talented inventor/hobbyist neighbor.
Offline
#3 2012-01-29 18:06:09
It looks to fly so slowly and close to the water, they probably just look like a big wave to a radar operator.
Offline
#4 2012-01-29 18:14:32
GooberMcNutly wrote:
It looks to fly so slowly and close to the water, they probably just look like a big wave to a radar operator.
Unfortunately they don't come close to the badassery of the Russian ekranoplan:
Offline
#5 2012-01-29 19:03:27
GooberMcNutly wrote:
It looks to fly so slowly and close to the water, they probably just look like a big wave to a radar operator.
Correct!!!
Those are so much more stealthy than cruise missiles that fly 20ft above the deck without any moving external parts.
Offline
#6 2012-01-30 08:47:18
I would posit that most automated defense systems are programmed to reject all slow moving targets close to the water so they don't get overwhelmed by flocks of birds, large waves and fishing boats. Something moving at 300+ mph on the deck is most certainly up to no good. But those little ducks?
At least with exterior engines they can probably hear them coming in plenty of time to shoot them down, even manually. Get a couple of skeet shooters on the 50's and it would almost be fun.
Offline
#7 2012-01-30 09:39:49
GooberMcNutly wrote:
I would posit that most automated defense systems are programmed to reject all slow moving targets close to the water so they don't get overwhelmed by flocks of birds, large waves and fishing boats. Something moving at 300+ mph on the deck is most certainly up to no good. But those little ducks?
I don't agree...
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#8 2012-01-30 12:58:41
Emmeran wrote:
I don't agree...
Well, that did happen in a relatively busy harbor while it was being refueled. Two scuba divers hauling a suitcase could have done the same there.
It exposed a major point of failure in our naval defenses. While we have been spending billions of dollars to be able to see a spy plane 100 miles away we can't spot Cessna's flying at 60mph close to the water. Well, we *could*, but it's not sexy and doesn't let the military purchasing officers get high dollar stiffies when being feted by defense contractors.
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#9 2012-01-30 15:50:43
In Japan we at least have the right to sail within 500 feet of a US Navy vessel without heavy machine gun and rocket fire. Out on the water, I doubt they would get all that close to a carrier group. Awacs, patrolling fighters, radar, sonar, no. They do look like fun to fly though! I look forward to they day when the free market brings these toys to the international playboy market.
Last edited by Tall Paul (2012-01-30 23:43:35)
Offline
#10 2012-01-30 21:43:44
Tall Paul wrote:
I look forward to they day when the free market brings these toys to the international playboy market.
I thought that was where the Ayatollah bought them. Well, at least the first one, but I'm guessing nobody is going to be suing him for licensing fees.
Offline
#11 2012-01-31 00:30:55
Tall Paul wrote:
In Japan we at least have the right to sail within 500 feet of a US Navy vessel without heavy machine gun and rocket fire. Out on the water, I doubt they would get all that close to a carrier group.
Probably smart. Light machine gun fire or less can fuck you up at 500 feet.
Offline
#12 2012-01-31 15:58:21
Offline
#13 2012-01-31 16:03:20
So have you seen some of the crap they have done with those things these days? They actually had them set up around Baghdad, using some magic blinky boxes and super radar, they can shoot INDIVIDUAL mortar shells in flight. At the same time, said blinky boxes determine the source grid coordinates and called in arty fire. All this before the first shell could even hit the ground.
I have it from a good source that they can also use the same listening system to pinpoint snipers and call in hell on their asses too.
Offline
#14 2012-01-31 19:33:12
XregnaR wrote:
So have you seen some of the crap they have done with those things these days? They actually had them set up around Baghdad, using some magic blinky boxes and super radar, they can shoot INDIVIDUAL mortar shells in flight. At the same time, said blinky boxes determine the source grid coordinates and called in arty fire. All this before the first shell could even hit the ground.
I have it from a good source that they can also use the same listening system to pinpoint snipers and call in hell on their asses too.
The triangulation stuff for Arty has been around for a while, it was part of the technology package that scared the hell out of the Ruskies in the '80s. Use on mortars and snipers is a brand new and scary ballgame.
(The Russians had a track-mounted equivilant called the ZSU-23/4, it was designed to disrupt CAS, we have the same thing as a M163.)
Offline
#15 2012-02-01 08:30:40
Yeah, when I first experienced a live Phalanx, it was damn near a religious experience. And I was prepared for it. Imagine swabbing the deck and having it light off without warning.
It was exactly what I was thinking of when I commented.
But it's downside is that it's entirely computer driven and the software automatically filters out slow things close to the ground or it would empty out every time a flock of seagulls or some pelicans came swooping in. So it would probably miss these Iranian flying canoes. The watch rotation loves them because nobody has to stand next to the .50 for a whole shift freezing their balls off when you trust the Phalanx to provide sea level cover. Except when it doesn't.
Offline
#17 2012-02-01 15:19:45
GooberMcNutly wrote:
Yeah, when I first experienced a live Phalanx, it was damn near a religious experience. And I was prepared for it. Imagine swabbing the deck and having it light off without warning.
It was exactly what I was thinking of when I commented.
But it's downside is that it's entirely computer driven and the software automatically filters out slow things close to the ground or it would empty out every time a flock of seagulls or some pelicans came swooping in. So it would probably miss these Iranian flying canoes. The watch rotation loves them because nobody has to stand next to the .50 for a whole shift freezing their balls off when you trust the Phalanx to provide sea level cover. Except when it doesn't.
good point.
Offline
