3 ms·

Iran's 'Aircraft Carrier' Seen in New Detail

1 points by pinewurst 2y ago

talldayo 2y ago
I think modern navel combat suggests that a boat is only as effective as the weapons you put on it. It's all fun and games raising a high-cost navy until someone launches a hypersonic attack on you at-port or at sea. No CIWS onboard? You're vulnerable to subsonic Shahed missiles. No point-defense interceptor? Your entire ship could get annihilated with a kinetic penetrator with an extremely predictable trajectory. Can't launch standoff weapons? You have to risk pilots to launch ground attack or SEAD missions. The whole thing is going to be an expensive target for whoever they pick on. Iran themselves could likely annihilate their own ship were it to attack them; how they expect to defend against a tenured adversary is anyone's guess.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  I confess I'm somewhat terrified of this. It can be made of rusty tin foil, leak like hell, have no defense at all, but if it can carry a mid-sized aircraft, Iran can use this to menace, piss off and irritate anyone on the planet. Possibly soon with nuclear weapons. > The whole thing is going to be an expensive target for whoever they pick on. Yeah, a target you'd be pretty stupid to fire at. This may be the cheapest shittiest knock off, but it still represents what aircraft carriers do, which is a bit of sovereign floating territory. Iran's gonna slow boat this thing to all kinds of obnoxious menacing hostile places, fire off some rounds, and triple dog dare anyone to do a single thing about it. A giant bristling floating target symbol, that sucks & keeps ending up obnoxiously close to adversaries shores, that maybe has nuclear weapons on it. This is a shitty future and one I wish there were protocols for sinking.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    It'll be interesting to watch unfold. I don't lose sleep over nuclear-equipped aircraft carriers like I do nuclear submarines. If you triple-dog dare someone to launch an anti-shipping attack on your glorified cargo freighter, there are multiple countries that will accept the challenge. If you make it a nuclear threat, you just gave your enemies an RSVP and casus belli. I don't like discounting Iran's capabilities, and I don't support the brinkmanship that is implied by blowing up an aircraft carrier. From a pragmatic perspective though, I just don't understand how this survives in a contested environment without importing Kalibr missiles and Russian point defense. Tomcats and subsonic drones are barely enough to harass a modernized military, and poorly suited to defense against retaliation.

1 points by pinewurst 2y ago

I think modern navel combat suggests that a boat is only as effective as the weapons you put on it. It's all fun and games raising a high-cost navy until someone launches a hypersonic attack on you at-port or at sea. No CIWS onboard? You're vulnerable to subsonic Shahed missiles. No point-defense interceptor? Your entire ship could get annihilated with a kinetic penetrator with an extremely predictable trajectory. Can't launch standoff weapons? You have to risk pilots to launch ground attack or SEAD missions. The whole thing is going to be an expensive target for whoever they pick on. Iran themselves could likely annihilate their own ship were it to attack them; how they expect to defend against a tenured adversary is anyone's guess.

jauntywundrkind 2y ago
I confess I'm somewhat terrified of this. It can be made of rusty tin foil, leak like hell, have no defense at all, but if it can carry a mid-sized aircraft, Iran can use this to menace, piss off and irritate anyone on the planet. Possibly soon with nuclear weapons. > The whole thing is going to be an expensive target for whoever they pick on. Yeah, a target you'd be pretty stupid to fire at. This may be the cheapest shittiest knock off, but it still represents what aircraft carriers do, which is a bit of sovereign floating territory. Iran's gonna slow boat this thing to all kinds of obnoxious menacing hostile places, fire off some rounds, and triple dog dare anyone to do a single thing about it. A giant bristling floating target symbol, that sucks & keeps ending up obnoxiously close to adversaries shores, that maybe has nuclear weapons on it. This is a shitty future and one I wish there were protocols for sinking.
- talldayo 2y ago
  It'll be interesting to watch unfold. I don't lose sleep over nuclear-equipped aircraft carriers like I do nuclear submarines. If you triple-dog dare someone to launch an anti-shipping attack on your glorified cargo freighter, there are multiple countries that will accept the challenge. If you make it a nuclear threat, you just gave your enemies an RSVP and casus belli. I don't like discounting Iran's capabilities, and I don't support the brinkmanship that is implied by blowing up an aircraft carrier. From a pragmatic perspective though, I just don't understand how this survives in a contested environment without importing Kalibr missiles and Russian point defense. Tomcats and subsonic drones are barely enough to harass a modernized military, and poorly suited to defense against retaliation.