Iran to build aircraft carrier!

[Gerald]

My sons ... it is best that you please, otherwise I upload photos, which only consists of camels and sand,

[Jimbuna]

LOL

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

If I remember correctly, in 1980s they dispensed their destroyer force as there was apparently no need for such thing as ASW. Lately they have been building corvettes which were supposed to carry 57 mm, SSMs, SAMs, ASW torpedoes and ASW rockets. Swedish government as cost consicious opted to delete SAMs and ASW rockets from design. Therefore those magnificent ships' defence against aircraft and missiles rest solely on countermeasures and its 57 mm gun.

Finland is - despite its location in continental Europe - from trade point of view an island, most trade comes and leaves via sea. I have very little faith to Finnish Navy's capability to protect commercial shipping, but I have even less faith to Swedish Royal Navy's capability to do it. Sorry Swedes, you have great sub force but its not really great for commerce protection.

Lets take their Robotbåtar=missilboats: they have 40 mm AND 57 mm canon.

Do not underestimate the swedish navy when i comes to it's offensive skills and not to forget our Submarines, they are the best in the world.

It's was their defensive skills I was critising.

It's a shame that my duty was in the end of the 80'ies and the movie "The Sum of all fear" came in 2002. 'cause, then I would said to him:
did you see this scen, were the russian bombers send all those missiles against the carrier from USA? That's how it's gonna be.

I'm about to order a swedish book, a book about the navy's history.

Back to this iranian dream of world domination and it's first goal: Build their first carrier.

After my duty in the swedish navy I went to back to school to get further education. During this period I became good friend with an elder man from Iran. He had a rang higher that captain in the Iranian navy,

He flet with his family to sweden, about 2-3 years after the religious revolution.

I could be wrong, but I'm sure he said, that the iranian was thinking in terms of buiding lots of small highspeeds boats with a 40 mm guns and 2 by 2 missils.

Some years after he told me this: The swedish news told us swedes, that the iranian government had ordret many small boats from some swedish boat designer. If I'm not wrong the order was about 200 of them.

So the iranian must have "Re think" their navy's roll in the area the last 20 years.

Markus

[Gerald]

I think this may well be true, they have made some upgrades to the fleet, TS can confirm this, with links .. it's better to office people do things like this,

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by mapuc

Do not underestimate the swedish navy when i comes to it's offensive skills and not to forget our Submarines, they are the best in the world.

Care to provide the evidence to back that up...preferably where they have proven the fact in war conditions when crewed by Swedes?

[magicstix]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Care to provide the evidence to back that up...preferably where they have proven the fact in war conditions when crewed by Swedes?

Gotland class subs are about as loud as a flashlight, I'll give them that, but they're not invisible nor invincible. As previously stated the problem of surface vs sub is an issue of training, not equipment. There seems to be this pervasive mindset in the submarine community that surface ships have no clue they're even there, and that's simply not true.

[CCIP]

Well it's not combat conditions, but the Gotland has certainly got enough eyebrows raised in the US Navy - enough to lease her for two years. I'd say that's a pretty big mark of approval on her from the most capable navy in the world.

Otherwise any notion of 'best' is always tricky - you can't ever come up with an inarguable definition of that. The only one you can defend is 'most successful', and in that sense no current-generation combat sub can be called 'most successful'. Nobody's subs have really scored in any actual ASW or ASuW combat as of late.

[soopaman2]

So what I'm reading here is the Swedish Navy can kick the garbage out the US navy?

I may be misunderstanding the banter, but would you care to compare numbers...I know the US spends more on it's military budget then the top 3 countries below us. We provide the UN with a majority of it's hardware and manpower and financial support, all for China and Russia to veto us, just because they hate us.

You can tell me USA sucks for alot of things, but militarily isn't one of them.

USS Constitution for the win!

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

@Mapuc:
My critic was mostly directed to Royal Swedish Navy's ships self defence capability which in my opinion is not sufficient to current conditions. This largely applies to Finnish Navy as well.

Warship which only exists to see first salvo incoming is rather useless in my opinion. What if attacker is aircraft? Without credible means to shoot aircraft and possibly incoming missile down, your navy's nice corvette is not much more than high price practice target. Same applies to many of our ships too and none of them have any serious capability to sustain even minor scale saturation attack without going down.

In Finnish Navy only vessels with even somewhat credible air defence capability are Hamina class missile boats (guns + Umkhonto) and Hämeenmaa class minelayers/escorts (guns + Umkhonto). If real shooting starts in Baltic Sea I don't believe Finnish Navy to be much more than a bad joke.

[magicstix]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

You can tell me USA sucks for alot of things, but militarily isn't one of them.

Except that we have an F-22 that can't fly, an F-35 severely overbudget, a DDG the Navy doesn't even want but is getting crammed down its throat, and an LCS that is little more than a hull since all of its modules keep getting cancelled....

[Jimbuna]

All I'm asking for in #50 and in response to the comment made in #48 is evidence to back up a firm statement.

If I'd stated the Astute class is the most lethal stealth equipped offensive weapon under the oceans surface (which some would attest to and bearing in mind it's abysmal track record thus far) I would expect to be challenged.

There are submersible platforms out there, most noticeably US and UK who have been tried and tested in 'the real world'....the world in which they were designed to operate in who have aquitted themselves extremely well.

I remember living in Holland during the gulf war and hearing similar statements from my Dutch friends and colleagues but they never had an answer when asked to prove why they considered their subs to be the best.

'No track record' springs to mind.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

All I'm asking for in #50 and in response to the comment made in #48 is evidence to back up a firm statement.

If I'd stated the Astute class is the most lethal stealth equipped offensive weapon under the oceans surface (which some would attest to and bearing in mind it's abysmal track record thus far) I would expect to be challenged.

There are submersible platforms out there, most noticeably US and UK who have been tried and tested in 'the real world'....the world in which they were designed to operate in who have aquitted themselves extremely well.

I remember living in Holland during the gulf war and hearing similar statements from my Dutch friends and colleagues but they never had an answer when asked to prove why they considered their subs to be the best.

'No track record' springs to mind.

Still on line so possibly awaiting others to feed in so making a response easier.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by magicstix

Except that we have an F-22 that can't fly, an F-35 severely overbudget, a DDG the Navy doesn't even want but is getting crammed down its throat, and an LCS that is little more than a hull since all of its modules keep getting cancelled....

Well we have to feed our military industrial complex, the one General Ike warned us about in a speech on his way out, from his presidency in the 50s.
Heck your 100% right.

But 700 +plus bases worldwide......It saddens me honestly, so many people here struggling, only to build useless f35 engines we won't use. But Cicero said that money is the sinews of war, or something like that. (at least until China and Japan say "enough")

One day people will be playing a war game about us in our time.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

@Mapuc:
My critic was mostly directed to Royal Swedish Navy's ships self defence capability.

That's what I wrote earlier in this thread.

I was pointing at their defence capability. when I had this discussion with a fellow during my military duty.

Markus

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Care to provide the evidence to back that up...preferably where they have proven the fact in war conditions when crewed by Swedes?

Originally Posted by mapuc

That's what I wrote earlier in this thread.

I was pointing at their defence capability. when I had this discussion with a fellow during my military duty.

Markus

Still awaiting an answeer 'respectfully'