It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iran: Stealth 'Flying Boat' Successfully Tested

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 04:36 PM
curme, I like your "History of the World part 1" take, LOL! "We are armed with the mighty joint!" "Do you care it Empire falls? What? The Empire. Uck it!"

"Pardo pardon pardon, you are p!ssin on my SUE." "It's good to be the King!" "count the money, count the money!, --- mOOney, say it , mOOOney!"

And who can forget the wondrous end, Hitler on Ice, Jews in space, etc. Thank you for reminding it, I'll put on a DVD soon.

proprog, thanks for the video and pics, they are very telling, and I would like to put in my few cents on the choice of such a design.

First of all I would like to elaborate on the misunderstood stealth capabilities of this particular design.

WIG based craft are not based on the traditional aerodynamics properties. The load bearing infrastructure and wing root of ekranoplans are governed by different requirements.

Instead of lift, it relies on the WIG effect, aerodynamics of which create a continuously regenerated air cushion formed under the craft. Since the craft can not use traditional lift properties of the wing to safely travel at such low altitude, it "hovers" on the air cushion which is constantly pushed forward.

Such aerodynamic effect does not require wing flex and therefore negates the need for wing root reinforcement, allowing the use of cheap low density materials with lower tolerance threshold levels in comparison to traditional aircraft.

This allows the use wood and basic composites, which by their very virtue are radar absorbent.

The Iranian Ekranoplan could very well be entirely built out of wood and fiberglass, with minimal aluminum supporting frame for the engine , and in conjunction with its obvious stealth tuned shape, minimal silhouette and simple sea blue camo makes it EXTREMELY stealthy, and gives it a RCS lower then of a WWI wooden bi-plane.

Couple that with low speed and sea skimming altitude of little over a foot or too, such a craft will be an absolute nightmare to locate even at close distance.

What spiked my interest was the open piston engine configuration. Initially it looks rather low tech do to its open high drag design, but then it makes a lot of sense.

The engine support frame is minimal, and even though the pictures are to grainy, it look like the exhaust pipes are ducted into the fuselage, which again makes perfect sense, because duct mixing the exhausts with the air stream of the cushion under the fuselage will achieve incredible IR signature reduction.

The engine it self looks squared, suggesting large radiated water (or oil) cooling, and common sense dictates that the whole unit can be easily covered by a thermally insulated and aerodynamic radar absorbent/deflective cover, thus reducing drag and IR/RCS signatures.

The choice of piston engine also makes "stealth" sense. Considering intended operational speeds and small size of the craft, other then previously mentioned low emissions advantages, piston engine will be quieter then comparable fan turbine, (possibly even employing a muffler section, engaged after full unmuffled power take off) and will use less fuel and further increase already incredible range advantages offered by WIG.

Its propeller can also be manufactured completely out of composites, and have nose reduction tuned variable pitch blades.

While turbine fan blades require specialized ducting and masking in order to lower the RCS, a composite propeller by default has a much lower return then the turbine.

If anyone knows the details please correct me if I'm mistaken, or elaborate with details if I'm correct on the following.

At such low altitudes, a non turboprop low rpm composite propeller will either not react to pulse doppler effect at all, or its signature will be automatically filtered out as ground clutter by targeting computers.

Combination of such features will require visual ID In order to successfully locate and engage such a target. This will naturally force a considerable saturation increase of the CAP area, and will require a major resource commitment to the carrier group defense.

All of this increases air traffic, lowers sortie numbers, deployment intervals, etc. Logistical "leeching" from such a seemingly "harmless" and low tech prop drive ekranoplan dramatically underlines such incredible cost vs effectiveness ratio.

The question of its weapon delivery capabilities still remain, and even though the video is very grainy, I did identified a clear separation seam of the nose cone section, suggesting that it might be actuated, opening the possibility of weapon housing in the fuselage of the craft.

Most Russian ekranoplans have actuated nose cone sections, and it is very plausible that Iranian ekranoplan does as well. If It is in fact so, then considering that the craft is powered by an outboard motor, the fuselage section should be free of equipment and will be able to carry a large payload, such as a Shkval torpedo.

This will mean that the deployment of the weapon is possible on the move, and even though 7km does not seem like a considerable distance, small size of the craft and its low emissions can very well allow it to get with in striking distance, while being fully supported by its long combat endurance.

This is my take on this, so please pitch in and share your thoughts.


[edit on 4-4-2006 by iskander]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 12:02 AM
I have a question:

What exactly do you mean by 'long combat endurance' in this case?

Also how exactly will the Shkval be launched from this erkanoplane?
Shkvals cavitate even when launch from above the water?

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Daedalus3
I have a question:

What exactly do you mean by 'long combat endurance' in this case?

Also how exactly will the Shkval be launched from this erkanoplane?
Shkvals cavitate even when launch from above the water?

Combat endurance is a measure of time any given weapon platform is able to spend in a combat area given its assigned mission and proximity to its base of operation.

Here is the example for the A-7 Corsair II

Combat endurance, CAP 150 nm
from aircraft carrier

Shkval is launched from the launch tube by igniting the starter liquid fuel generating pressurized gas propelling it to 50kts. Upon water entry main motor initiates and rapidly accelerates to the threshold of supercavitaion.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 01:52 AM
ROFL ROFL ROFL... so A WIGE kit craft with a significantly less advanced higher metallic content than the original is a threat? You can buy better kits in america with a bombardier/rotax engine kit with streamlined cowling for less than a brand new corvette. If this is a threat then sign up my jeep cj-5 as a light amored tank hunting vehicle.

EDIT: In other words this is beyond laughable ... it's the best dilbert, calvin and hobbes, and snoopy comic rolled into one with a triple dose of dental laugh gas before you read them.

[edit on 5-4-2006 by astral_ice]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 02:07 AM
well , the "flying boat "

may be laughable

but a 223mph torpedo is NOT !

anyways I see lots of sabre rattling
not to mention another contrived
"problem" for the world

or to put it another way
yet ANOTHER set-up for the masses

ummmm, how many is that now ?!?!?!

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 02:29 AM
Alrighty then......

Propaganda fodder plaine and simple and the US media is bitting on it like flies on stink IMHO.

Okay: Is the plane stealthy? based on my limited knowledge: NO!

Curved surfaced do not nessesarily a stealth aircraft make. Also those look like winglets right? Not stealthy either. Is it a ground effect craft? Maybe, but the a huge part of a radar return from a ship is its wake and a ground effect craft would leave a big one.

Engine: From a RCS and an infrared standpoint, its easy pickings. The propeller itself would be a huge part of the return as are the rotating blades of a turbine. The engine is not buried in the frame in any way shape or form so its exposed for every IR scanner or search radar to see.

Engine part II: How much HP do you think that ting has? Can it lift a meaningfull payload to hit a USN ship? DO we know the weight on the "rocket torpedo" ? Can this craft lift it?

Unless Iran intends to use it as a Kamakazi type strike aircraft. Don't scoff, remember the mass suicide attack waves in the Iran / Iraq war?

[edit on 4/5/06 by FredT]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 03:53 AM
damm it i had a blistering rebuttal to this flight of fantasy rattling round my head but every one seems to have posted most of my objections to this fantasy - so all that remains is

how and where is this toy going to carry a fish ?????



Length 26 ft 11 in (8,200 mm)
Diameter 1 ft 9 in ( 533 mm)
Weight 5,953 lb (2,700 kg)

the missile is FAR bigger than thie iranian WIG
ooops !

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 04:00 AM
astral_ice and FredT,

I have to ask, did you guys have a chance to read my previous post?

Everything you've mentioned I have covered in detail.

The RCS, the engine, propeller, links to WIG tech, etc.

What's the motivation, on what did you base your comments, on what grounds do you disagree and with what exactly?

What does anything have to do with Iran suicide waves?

significantly less advanced higher metallic content than the original is a threat

What does that mean?

That metal is better for lowering RCS then composites?

I feel like I've all the sudden warped into a completely unrelated thread, I'm lost here guys, help me out.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 04:09 AM
I personally wouldn't like to be on board of USN Ship in CBG that gets the full load of "Iranian harware":
Torpedos, both conventional and SHKVAL + Exocets + other AS missiles+ Ballistic missiles + submarines + Mines +well timed attack = lots of evasive manouvers and seasickness for me

But seriously i think that Iran might be able to at least damage USN ships if it uses its weaponry with good tactics and in co-operation between it's units.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 04:16 AM
bbc real video about this craft

I believe Iran is up to something it is building and designing all types of weapons.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 04:17 AM
I'm not following at all.

So if ekranoplan is a loony dream, what's this?

Is the possibility of scaling it down is just completely loonytoons?

If they have this one, there's no way they can have a bigger one, right?

It's the kind of corporal mentality that gets a lot good men dead. "Hey if I wasn't told otherwise and If I haven't seen it with my own eyes the ville is clear."

Again, I'm just not following.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 04:34 AM
It was an airplane that made test flights and never saw service.

The apparent success of these machines hid some very real problems, not least of which were serious stability and control deficiencies, as well as tremendous power requirements to get off the water. Under low flying conditions radar sensors measuring altitude, tilt and velocity of craft trace the variable profile of wave disturbance practically without averaging, thus making it difficult to gauge the motion parameters in relation to the undisturbed level of the sea surface. It is necessary to combine radar with other sensors in order to provide high accuracy. It has a massive turning circle, and is fairly slow to accelerate. Its poor manoeuverability means it cannot turn and run from a fight, and so is a fairly easy target if caught in a confined space, or if surrounded and pushed against the shoreline.

In 1989, after the tragic accident on nuclear submarine "Komsomolets" where 42 mariners died, the decision was made to re-equipment the second "Lun", being at that time under construction, into a search-and-rescue maritime ekranoplane "Spasatel". The second copy of "Lun" had 6 engines, instead of 8. A considerable part of the work had already been accomplished by the time of the breakup of the Soviet Union, followin which there was a drastic reduction of the budget of the Russian Navy.

However, the changing political tide and struggling economy in the Soviet Union caused the Ekranoplan concept to fall out of favor, and a second Lun was never completed. The Alexeiev Design Bureau remains in operation and continues to propose new designs for civilian use, but the market has not yet developed.

The earlier version, with 10 engines flew for many years, but underwent MANY modifications, and both versions had several problems to overcome.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 05:11 AM
Zaphod58 you are incorrect,

It's not an airplane, it's a ekranoplan.

It was put in service in 1987.

It was a militarized version. (NATO correctly identified it as a carrier attack platform, and do to its capability of carrying nuclear weapons it was cut under treaties)

A whole fleet of various models and of all sizes have been flying since the 60s, and are flying to this day.

The stability problems were suffered by early models from the 60s. Modernized (70s) flight control systems eliminated all instability problems. The units which did crash, crashed do to pilot error.

I do not understand how posting the summary of Luns service changes the fact of successfull 50 year ekranoplan concept use, and how it changes the reality of the threat posed to our carrier fleet.

Arguing that ekranoplans do not work is like denying that airplanes fly, it's ludicrous.

In the case of Iranian development, it is by far not a laughing matter. Our carrier fleet is in clear and present danger from deployment of such weapons.

Turning a blind eye and laughing of such an obvious threat to our servicemen is simply irresponsible.

Let me put it this way, if a cop is questioning a suspect he's about to arrest for possession of controlled substances, and the suspect pulls out a magazine packed with AP green tips, does anybody actually think the cop will laugh and ask if the suspect really has a gun to shoot with? Did he paint the green tips on him self? Are those rounds live or movie blanks? etc.

I not paranoid, but when some guy pulls out a knife and casually starts picking at his fingernails, I size up his reach and count how many steps separate me from the tip of his blade.

In case of Iran, it's 7500. Let's hope everything has been counted and measured.


[edit on 5-4-2006 by iskander]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 05:32 AM
First of all, those quotes were taken directly from sites ABOUT your precious Ekranoplan.

Oh sorry, I used the wrong word when I said airplane. Sue me.
And technically YOU are wrong too. It's a WIG. Whether it's Soviet, American, or Iranian, it's STILL a WIG.

The Lun Ekranoplan was launched in 1987 so don't tell me that 1970s flight controls solved all the problems that were mentioned, as it STILL had problems to overcome relating to the quote I posted. It may have overcome stability problems, but those weren't the only problems mentioned. They still had giant turn radius problems, were slower than a plane, etc.

One of the major issues that STILL exists for a WIG, especially larger ones is the fact that the wake is so bad from them that a SUBMARINE can track them on sonar.

I never said that WIG doesn't work. I said that WIG as an ATTACK PLATFORM had issues to deal with. WIG as a transport is a great idea.

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 06:00 AM
It's not "my precious Ekranoplan", it's about the facts.

This is from my post above,

will use less fuel and further increase already incredible range advantages offered by WIG.

It may have overcome stability problems, but those weren't the only problems mentioned. They still had giant turn radius problems, were slower than a plane, etc.

One of the major issues that STILL exists for a WIG, especially larger ones is the fact that the wake is so bad from them that a SUBMARINE can track them on sonar.

Oh, so it's like, 5T trucks overcame stability problems, but still had giant turn radius and were slower then sport cars, and their freeway noise was so bad you could hear them coming from another county.

I do agree with you that both 5T trucks and Ekranoplans make great transports.

I'm just not all that sure about a 5T truck being a good weapon platform...

[edit on 5-4-2006 by iskander]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 07:46 AM
Even if that pile of garbage was able to penetrate the outer defenses of a carrier battle group, which it would have 0% chance in doing anyways, the phalanx would turn that flying terd into mist in less than 1 second with about 100 rounds of depleted uranium.

Nothing would even get close enough to even launch that underwater torpedo thing.


posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 07:50 AM

Originally posted by Mehran
the boat is capable of carrying its missile like the F-22 raptor does and poses a big thread especially with all the anti ship missiles we have and our missile Hoot ( VA-111 shkval)

Children is China has toys also can carry missile like F-22 Raptor

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 07:58 AM
here is some other pictures of our (iranian) abilites:

and have you ever heared something about SHAFAGH (iranian fighter)?

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 08:12 AM
okay... I think Iskender's precious Ekranoplans are getting an unfair bashing... the Lun was definately a formidible troop carrier and possible cruise missle platform, and although the Iranian thingy shown does look a little shonky in comparison, there could be something in the lo- tech stealth of the craft... hell balsa wood is very radar absorbant

but whether it can have the integrity to launch a reverse engineered russian supercavitating torpedo... hmm... I think that is a little unrealistic (unless it isnt meant to survive one launch
Iran-Iraq war style)...

this is total sabre rattling stuff... warfare boils down to air power at the end of the day.. and what does Iran have there... some made up photoshopped 'stealth' fighter (see some post on ATS a year or two ago)?

Iran could make a formidible enemy to invade.. but not through these bit-part military technology investments (perhaps over years) but through their numbers, willingness to fight an invader and experience in guerrila and Tet offensive style overwhelming suicide tactics...

That is not to say that Iran won't develop into a fully modern military power... but it will take more than a scaled down ekranoplan...


EDIT OMG!! I didnt notice the new thread with the old Shah-fighter!!!!
Is that still being peddled around as an Iranian stealth fighter????

[edit on 5/4/06 by Qoelet]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 10:47 AM

Originally posted by proprog
here I have a few close up pictures of the Iranian WIG craft:

My 2 cents: It borrows some stealth features of M-ATF fighter design, like larger wings, etc.

And here is the much-wanted video clip, check it out:


Yep, it's a wings in ground effect craft. It's too small to carry most anti-ship weapons and it certainly isn't stealthy, although flying low and reasonably fast it certainly is under most radar coverage until reasonably close.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in