Iran/US conflict

Skybird · 07-19-19, 01:18 PM

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49053383

And Iran got a UK-flagged tanker, as I feared they would: only a question of time. Symbolic station presence and one or two ships scattered across a way too huge ocean just is not the way to go.

Arm those damn merchants and tankers and have firing crews on them, missiles and heavy MGs, and snipers with heavy callibre rifles that can penetrate light armour, the likes of M107 and similar callibres. These teams can be shuttled onto deck and off deck again via helicopter, jumping from one ship to the next as needed for transit. One has to fight the Iranians where they attack, not where one wants them and hopes them to be. I am sure there are small missiles types the likes of Milan that can be used with great effect not against tanks, but speed boats like the RG uses them, that get moved by two-man teams only and are easy and fast to mount and demount. There are missiles for every task. ASM may be too heavy, with weights from 100 to 700 kg, but why not ATGMs: with fragmentation warheads or HE warheads that are launched form shoulder or from tripods? Sounds about right against ships the size of RG speed boats. And of ATGMs there are more than enough models and types. Their range usually is somewhere between ~ 1 and 4.5 km - perfect for the task at hand.

Also: convoys, why don't they form escorted convoys but just sit and hope and waste time...? The first incident should have been a warning, this defeat - thats what it is - now was completely needless. Another nail in the coffin of European approach to the Iran matter.

Also, I would choose traffic routes for tankers as far north and as close to Iranian borders as legally possible - to maximise the chance that any tanker spilling oil will present the Iranians the pleasure of dealing with a formidable oil pest on their coastline.

07-19-19, 01:18 PM	#11
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 40,648 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49053383 And Iran got a UK-flagged tanker, as I feared they would: only a question of time. Symbolic station presence and one or two ships scattered across a way too huge ocean just is not the way to go. Arm those damn merchants and tankers and have firing crews on them, missiles and heavy MGs, and snipers with heavy callibre rifles that can penetrate light armour, the likes of M107 and similar callibres. These teams can be shuttled onto deck and off deck again via helicopter, jumping from one ship to the next as needed for transit. One has to fight the Iranians where they attack, not where one wants them and hopes them to be. I am sure there are small missiles types the likes of Milan that can be used with great effect not against tanks, but speed boats like the RG uses them, that get moved by two-man teams only and are easy and fast to mount and demount. There are missiles for every task. ASM may be too heavy, with weights from 100 to 700 kg, but why not ATGMs: with fragmentation warheads or HE warheads that are launched form shoulder or from tripods? Sounds about right against ships the size of RG speed boats. And of ATGMs there are more than enough models and types. Their range usually is somewhere between ~ 1 and 4.5 km - perfect for the task at hand. Also: convoys, why don't they form escorted convoys but just sit and hope and waste time...? The first incident should have been a warning, this defeat - thats what it is - now was completely needless. Another nail in the coffin of European approach to the Iran matter. Also, I would choose traffic routes for tankers as far north and as close to Iranian borders as legally possible - to maximise the chance that any tanker spilling oil will present the Iranians the pleasure of dealing with a formidable oil pest on their coastline. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 07-19-19 at 01:41 PM.