4 ms·

Why would it be outside of Iran capabilities? They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones.

by cyberax 8mo ago

bigyabai 8mo ago
It's not impossible. Iran has connections with China, who is great at designing and manufacturing UUVs. That said, a UUV fleet would have downsides for Iran. It's expensive, dependent on imports and an overmatch for swarm-style attacks. Attack boats are a closer fit for the "cheap/attritable" tactics we see used with Shaheds.
- cyberax 8mo ago
  I think you're overestimating the complexity of small unmanned subs. Drug traffickers are building _manned_ subs now in South American jungles. You just need a body (plastic tube), batteries, motors, and a computer. Maybe with a "range extender" gas engine. Everything can be COTS, and Iran certainly can manufacture occasional custom components. After all, it can manufacture centrifuges for uranium enrichment.
  - bigyabai 8mo ago
    Maybe! Most of those unmanned narcosubs are cut-down speedboats hulls, to my knowledge. The truly watertight/submerged ones are few and far between; it's a lot of investment for marginal decrease in observability. My money is still on low-observable attack craft, or a high-low mix that deprioritizes submersibles. Iran has an impressive panopoly but also has casus belli to lie out their nose. If Iran does have fully submersable UUVs, I'd expect them to be saved for a direct confrontation with the US Navy, not tankers. I could definitely be wrong though, I don't have any insider info to work with here.
    - cyberax 8mo ago
      > Most of those unmanned narcosubs are cut-down speedboats hulls, to my knowledge. Some are now fully submersible: https://insightcrime.org/news/under-radar-what-hundreds-ofnarco-sub-seizures-tell-us-about-global-cocaine-routes/ https://insightcrime.org/news/under-radar-what-hundreds-ofna... I think it is indeed more likely that they used a low-profile boat, but I won't discount a full submersible. Or maybe a combination: a low-profile boat that uses a regular outboard gas engine to get close to the target, and then dives and attacks like a torpedo. > If Iran does have fully submersable UUVs, I'd expect them to be saved for a direct confrontation with the US Navy, not tankers. I don't think they can do serious damage to large US Navy vessels.
dingaling 8mo ago
> They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones. Shaheeds are aerodynamic clones of the Israeli Harpy SEAD drone, which in turn were based on the German Dornier DAR of the 1980s. Compared to the loitering anti-radar DAR, the Shaheed is electronically extremely simple and not much more advanced than the WW2 V-1. The fact that Russia started producing Shaheeds reflects more on the poor state of Russian industry than any sophistication of Iranian technology.
- fc417fc802 8mo ago
  It's so odd that in modern America weapons being cheap and practical is often seen as a negative. Have to make sure to fork over a couple million per shot to a defence contractor.
  - DrProtic 8mo ago
    Guy is full of it though. Iranian drones are very effective while American Switchblade drones shit the bed completely in Ukraine. We have US cloning Iranian drones now https://www.euronews.com/2026/03/10/flm-136-americas-cheap-iran-designed-shahed-drone-clone https://www.euronews.com/2026/03/10/flm-136-americas-cheap-i...
    - infamia 8mo ago
      You're comparing apples, bananas, and pineapples while pretending they're all one thing. Switchblades are extremely effective (albeit expensive) anti-personnel (300 model) and anti-armor (600 model) drones. Shaheds are much larger, cheap, low on capabilities, but attritable used to attack fixed positions (e.g., buildings). These are all very different.
      - Teever 8mo ago
        That's the point -- maybe the US should have bought apples instead of buying bananas.
        8mo ago

Why would it be outside of Iran capabilities? They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones.

by cyberax 8mo ago

Why would it be outside of Iran capabilities? They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones.

It's not impossible. Iran has connections with China, who is great at designing and manufacturing UUVs. That said, a UUV fleet would have downsides for Iran. It's expensive, dependent on imports and an overmatch for swarm-style attacks. Attack boats are a closer fit for the "cheap/attritable" tactics we see used with Shaheds.

cyberax 8mo ago
I think you're overestimating the complexity of small unmanned subs. Drug traffickers are building _manned_ subs now in South American jungles. You just need a body (plastic tube), batteries, motors, and a computer. Maybe with a "range extender" gas engine. Everything can be COTS, and Iran certainly can manufacture occasional custom components. After all, it can manufacture centrifuges for uranium enrichment.
- bigyabai 8mo ago
  Maybe! Most of those unmanned narcosubs are cut-down speedboats hulls, to my knowledge. The truly watertight/submerged ones are few and far between; it's a lot of investment for marginal decrease in observability. My money is still on low-observable attack craft, or a high-low mix that deprioritizes submersibles. Iran has an impressive panopoly but also has casus belli to lie out their nose. If Iran does have fully submersable UUVs, I'd expect them to be saved for a direct confrontation with the US Navy, not tankers. I could definitely be wrong though, I don't have any insider info to work with here.
  - cyberax 8mo ago
    > Most of those unmanned narcosubs are cut-down speedboats hulls, to my knowledge. Some are now fully submersible: https://insightcrime.org/news/under-radar-what-hundreds-ofnarco-sub-seizures-tell-us-about-global-cocaine-routes/ https://insightcrime.org/news/under-radar-what-hundreds-ofna... I think it is indeed more likely that they used a low-profile boat, but I won't discount a full submersible. Or maybe a combination: a low-profile boat that uses a regular outboard gas engine to get close to the target, and then dives and attacks like a torpedo. > If Iran does have fully submersable UUVs, I'd expect them to be saved for a direct confrontation with the US Navy, not tankers. I don't think they can do serious damage to large US Navy vessels.

dingaling 8mo ago

> They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones. Shaheeds are aerodynamic clones of the Israeli Harpy SEAD drone, which in turn were based on the German Dornier DAR of the 1980s. Compared to the loitering anti-radar DAR, the Shaheed is electronically extremely simple and not much more advanced than the WW2 V-1. The fact that Russia started producing Shaheeds reflects more on the poor state of Russian industry than any sophistication of Iranian technology.

fc417fc802 8mo ago
It's so odd that in modern America weapons being cheap and practical is often seen as a negative. Have to make sure to fork over a couple million per shot to a defence contractor.
- DrProtic 8mo ago
  Guy is full of it though. Iranian drones are very effective while American Switchblade drones shit the bed completely in Ukraine. We have US cloning Iranian drones now https://www.euronews.com/2026/03/10/flm-136-americas-cheap-iran-designed-shahed-drone-clone https://www.euronews.com/2026/03/10/flm-136-americas-cheap-i...
  - infamia 8mo ago
    You're comparing apples, bananas, and pineapples while pretending they're all one thing. Switchblades are extremely effective (albeit expensive) anti-personnel (300 model) and anti-armor (600 model) drones. Shaheds are much larger, cheap, low on capabilities, but attritable used to attack fixed positions (e.g., buildings). These are all very different.
    - Teever 8mo ago
      That's the point -- maybe the US should have bought apples instead of buying bananas.
      - 8mo ago