Discussion in 'Free Fire Zone' started by CAC, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:34 AM.
Iranian special forces attack fake aircraft carrier as US bases go on missile alert
On one hand it is understandable they would practice on attacking a potential threat to them and a US super carrier is probably the biggest threat. Then again one has to wonder if the entire exercise is intended for domestic consumption, US carriers do not operate alone, but with a multi ship battle group, They remain on the move in any hostile environment, not anchored as this one appears to be. They don't let threats get that close and their strike groups don't sit docile on deck while a potential threat comes near.
Other than that I'm sure it was a smashing success!
I certainly get your point...but let’s say there are 5 times the assault boats (as seen in the picture) keeping operators busy...it’s the anti ship missiles and torpedoes that can be deployed from these small nimble craft that make them potentially a serious threat...the cheap speed boat vs the mega expensive carrier...I would presume this would be a littoral attack giving little reaction time...put this with a diversionary air attack (maybe just from drones) or a land based multiple missile attack... and I would think it’s a possibility...maybe enough to make the Americans think twice.
Unless I’m wrong Mr Kennedy’s PT boat was designed (amongst other things) for an attack on ships with their side torpedos...
Both of you are probably correct.
The fake "carrier" is for public consumption & propaganda value.
The tactics are essentially the same ones used by the Iranian paramilitary forces to capture several foreign merchant ships in recent years.
I think that the USN needs smaller fast well armed gunboats for anti-gunboat work.
Yeah, I miss the PHMs.
Unfortunately, the USN mantra is "bigger is better." Thus, we have those overpriced littoral monstrosities.
The overall problem seems to be a belief in the military, and the Congress that funds it, that because of the high cost of systems it must be multi-function to justify that cost. This is one possible threat, in one discrete area of the world to yet prove it is a real threat.
It's an important area of the world (at the moment) and one the Navy goes regularly.
I remember talking to a "Tanky" in the Australian Army about 25 years ago...he was saying how open he and his crew now feel, with enemy tanks, choppers and shoulder launched weapons able to do a tank damage...He no longer felt safe in his tank, indeed he felt increasingly open and a sitting duck.
I can't help but feel the same may apply to Carriers (including ours) - So big and relatively slow - with so many weapons that can be deployed from a distance and come in very fast.
I would argue the only reason it hasn't happened yet would be the possible retaliation such an attack would attract. Sure Iran sinks an American Carrier...but Iran is now a smouldering heap of ash (even without nukes).
I remember Hilary Clinton saying years ago that if Iran attacked the US they would "obliterate their country" - she said that publicly...
Wasn't an American Carrier burning badly last week? The story seems to have dropped off the radar.
Hmmm...Propaganda it may well be...but I would argue the message is not for domestic consumption but directly aimed at the US.
Propaganda for domestic consumption.
You do realize the mock-up was built in 2014, and first used as a target in 2015? This is not it's first live fire test.
Wasn't impressed in 2015, less impressed in 2020.
Hehe...im freak'n impressed! That's an awesome model...Looks a little small to my eyes though, not quite to scale.
Can you blame him? He was a sitting duck. The Aussie MBT back then was the elderly Leopard 1AS, purchased in '74 & delivered in '76. They had never been meaningfully upgraded to "modern"(circa 1995) standards. As such, the Leo 1s were woefully inadequate to handle, then current, threats. Further, Australia dithered for a long time on actually procuring "modern" MBTs, be for finally purchasing refurbished M1A1 Abrams from the US in 2004ish.
Back then, I too would have preferred a foxhole to the antiquated Leo 1.
The Iranian demonstration is what is known as "kiddie sh1t", and why I say it is for domestic consumption. Just a few points off the top of my head.
1. It's the religious paramilitary, not the "real" Navy. Which has most of the Iranian ship-killing missiles.
2. Mostly small speed boats with, at best, an ATGM of limited range. Few appear to have light ASM capability. The ballistic (possibly guided) missiles have received little report - These would be my major concern, as well as their submarines(which appear not to have participated). These would be Iran's front line carrier killers, not the speedboats & troops repelling from helicopters.
3. Takes place not far from Iranian shores...Not 12-13 miles out where the US carriers actually transit.
4. The target was an anchored undefended barge, not a 33+ knot carrier with it's own battle group.
It was 2008, and it was my state's (PA) primary day. She was stumping for votes, and did not want to appear weak. Obama called it correctly, that she was saber-rattling. You see, some months prior, she had said she did not discuss such hypotheticals, because it would tip the US hand if the person became President...And her she was tipping her hand. Would she or wouldn't she...Who knows. But, take with a large grain of salt what she says she would do while she was stumping for votes.
Nimitz class carriers don't have well decks to funnel oxygen directly to the heart of the fire. Lots of no-nos were broken.
The story is there for those looking for it. However, given the flashbulb attention span of most Americans, it is not front-page news anymore.
11 decks have varying degrees of damage, the island is gutted, the flight deck is warped & buckled. CNO is putting on a brave face, but the damage is very extensive. Scrap or rebuild is still very much an open question.l
They could have built a giant wooden Mickey Mouse; it would have about as much relevance to military readiness or training
It is, I believe, slightly larger than half scale.
It's not all that impressive when you consider the 2/3rd scale Chinese "Nimitz".
Yeah, it's made of concrete, and the water it "floats" in is a shallow artificial lake.
Caused a minor kerfluffle when it was built...Lots of rampant speculation on new Chinese carriers or as a training base for future Chines carrier pilots. Turned out, it was an incomplete military museum & entertainment center. The developers ran out of money, or the ChiComm govt. Changed their tack, and ceased funding - IIRC, it was around the same time they acquired their ex-Soviet carriers. Anywho, it was never fully completed. There was an effort to transform it into a hotel, entertainment, & shopping complex, but that seems to have died as well.
As she is now, in her hotel form.
it’s probably just me, but I think that’s cool...
Just wanted to return to this.
The Bonhomme Richard fire is a completely different situation - very undermanned, few crew aboard with real damage control/fire-fighting experience, suppression system disabled, etc.
Better to look at the USS George Washington(CV-73) fire of 2008, but still less than stellar performance. Fire fought for 12 hours, 8 of those was to find the source. Spread to 8 decks. $70 million in damage.
Thanks, mate. Much appreciated.
Always thought the Chinese Nimitz was cool, and long wanted to visit. Sad that it failed to materialize as intended.
There is still the Soviet carriers Kiev & Minsk in China to visit.
When I served on USS Saipan (LHA-2) we referred to her as Largest Hotel Afloat (among other things). Not quite true in terms of numbers, but we did have more "guest quarters" than Nimitz! On-site parking for their vehicles too