It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Iran Has Built "Suicide" Drones Capable Of Attacking U.S. Naval Ships

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:38 AM
link   
Low Orbit, what are you so worked up about? Because the terminology and naming should be taken in a figurative instead of a litteral way? I don't see how this means we can't discuss the merit of a UCAV/missile (your choice) that's optically guided to the target by an operator.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by WestPoint23]




posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Is that why Iran funds terrorist organizations in Israel Steve. Is that a defensive act for the nation of Iran? Pay Palestinians so they can blow themselves up and kill Israelis by proxy, that doesn't seem defensive to me. Neither does it when they ship large ied's into Iraq. What if the US decided to do the same thing to Iran tomorrow what would the situation be then?

My point WP is call it what it is, and since it doesn't have a terrorist on board it isn't a suicide drone. The word "suicide" is meant to stir up tensions and what better opportunity than this.

I'm going to go get a suicide soda, brb.



[edit on 12-2-2007 by Low Orbit]

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Low Orbit]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Doesn't the Phalanx system render these suicide drones useless?


Yes, if Phalanx works as advertised then these "drones" will be easy picking considering their speed/maneuverability and likely ECCM capabilities (if any).



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:43 AM
link   
This is just more Iranian propaganda. I think the CVN's CIWS ("Sea-Wiz") would take care of these things nicely, not a threat, just propaganda. Its also a huge waste of money to send these things at a carrier. The CIWS on a carrier or the Phalanx on a small boy renders these things obsolete against the USN. I've seen a Sea Wiz in action and I'll tell you what, if it flies it dies when it comes to one of those.



[edit on 12-2-2007 by ShAuNmAn-X]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:02 AM
link   
All this info on American abilities to protect their navy is very easily obtained.

So why would they bother investing,and creating such a menial means of offense? Especially when many other things much more useful could be obtained just as easy?

If you told me you lived you had a bullet proof vest on.... im not exactly going to walk up and punch you in the chest now am I ?

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
So why would they bother investing,and creating such a menial means of offense?


In an act of defiance, I'd guess. Are they gonna give up, or do what they can?

WP, Thanks.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
If you told me you lived you had a bullet proof vest on.... im not exactly going to walk up and punch you in the chest now am I ?

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Agit8dChop]


Well, Agit, 1st you have the term wrong, in Iran bullet proof vests are called "suicide vests."(don't understand read my above posts) So in Iran it is rare for someone to go up to a man wearing a "suicide vest" and punch him. Once we start using the correct terminology we find Iran's technology to be a bunch of poo!



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham

The indisputable fact of the matter is that the Iranian government is plowing big bucks in to R 'n D for the specified purpose of killing Americans.


YES!!! The U.S. military better watch out for those stealth camels.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:44 AM
link   
It's worth noting that today's best weapons systems started out as 'menial.' the iranian military-industrial complex is still in its infancy. the Iranians are developing a knowledge base for themselves that others already have...this is true...but...they're still doing it.

The drone that would be insiginificant against a carrier battle group at sea might still have other applications further inland. For those who care to remember, Global Hawk wasn't always the super-slick machine that it is today. This modern marvel had its roots in RC aircraft.

One last thing. If the Iranians said they were building these weapoons to defend themselves, we'd have to take them at their word. time and time again, they make it quite clear that their best military efforts are aimed at goals other than national defense. The killing of Americans might be satisfying to the average Jihadist on the go, but it's still not quite what most people think of when they hear the term "national defense."

Those of you who are getting wrapped around the axle over exact weapons capability miss the point made by others here. Never under-estimate the power of intent. Many of the most violent regimes have stated clearly and without stuttering what they planned to do long before their armies marched.

I've got a good view of the city I live in. With a pair of ten dollar binoculars, I can see just about every industrial target that matters. Some of you have read my stuff on trans-national terrorism. When it does come to this country, there won't be enough Patriot batteries to go around, and the men and women armed with the experience gained from those inexpensive little drones...could do some very inconvenient things.

Never laugh too hard at your enemies weapons. It will lessen the embarassment when they draw blood, which could be your own if you're too cocky to take them seriously.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Then we have the questions of how much endurance, range and payload would such a "drone" have? To be anything more than a nuisance (you can forget about sinking a carrier, it simply cannot be done this way) it would have to carry a substantial payload. However that would limit it's endurance and range, as well as impact kinematics.


Flat tops wouldn't be the only target available. Iran plan would be to lure the USN into the Persian Gulf there primary targets would be oil tankers . We may even see Wolf Pack style attacks . Since we can only guess the weapons payload and range for certain it is silly to rule anything out but I reckon it is quite likely that the likes of minesweepers would come under attack from the drones.

Never underestimate the enemy and remember that people once claimed that a Battleship couldn't be sunk by aircraft.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:36 AM
link   
This is laughable.

here, I'll do it...


We now have rail guns that can deliver shells from ship to inland up to 200 miles I think, not the paltry 15 miles of yesterday.

Too bad they don't have ships, because if they did we could test our 1700 mph torpedoes. Oh, maybe they won't pull those out just yet, got to use up the 250 mph ones first....

Hell, a DREAD weapon could conceivably take out one of those missiles, imagine a spray of 50 cal. ball bearings at 50K rpm breaking the sound barrier...

There is just no contest there.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
This is laughable.
here, I'll do it...

There is just no contest there.



Your amusement at people's inability to defend themselves, is truly nauseating.

Apply that logic to two people in real life.

The pinnacle of cowardice, honestly.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 04:24 AM
link   
it would be easy to overwhelm the tech of the US navy, 10,000 RC "suicide" drones, mix it in with a few sunburst missles 2 minutes later, while the air defense is shooting at planes, the missles get thru, or vice versa, it's a Numbers game ( besides, have any of you MET the Youth of america??, Not the sharpest pencils in the Box by a long way) those will be the folks Operating the defenses " a chain is only as strong as the weakest link" ( it would be like a Big strong smart Human messing with a Bee Hive, you might win in the end but your damn sure to be stung a few times!!)



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Sadly the USN would have to suffer a hefty defeat and loss of life to change peoples attitudes. Matyas people had similar attitudes towards Japanese aircraft before Pearl Harbour only after Asia had fallen to Nippon did people realize how wrong they had been.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by xpert11]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 05:00 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure the US army will lose at least one ship... With all the missiles Iran have... IMO, it will be like Israël in Lebanon... a failure, aside from the destruction of industrial infrastructures by mini-nukes... it will be the first war where nukes are used on a large scale... scary.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 05:42 AM
link   
I don't think the Army will be losing any ships soon[/sarcasm] But with their missiles they could take out a Navy vessel, granted the USN is equipped with the best anti missile technology but theres always the possibility. I'm not for going to war with Iran anyways unless they attack us first.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
so... they invented a fly-by-wire missile?

they know we already have those, right?



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by Matyas
This is laughable.
here, I'll do it...

There is just no contest there.



Your amusement at people's inability to defend themselves, is truly nauseating.

Apply that logic to two people in real life.

The pinnacle of cowardice, honestly.


I thought the pinnacle of cowardice, was the suicide bomber? I guess not for you Steve.

To the previous post, exactly right we have had these weapons for years the only thin that is new is the term "suicide drone."

Well Steve, I'm going to go eat some "suicide cereal."



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:14 AM
link   
The most important thing to remember about any weapons technology is that everything has a use. An RC plane might be any good against a carrier battlegroup, but it would be 'useful' against any number of soft targets inland. Then again, so would a slingshot and a pocket full of ball-bearings. 'Nough said.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Yeah, somehow, the word "suicide drone" does not seem to fit.

How about "Disposable drone"?
: But wait, most of the drones should be disposable (Although some of US military drones can cost a fortune, still too much just to be disposable)


What else can we call it? Kamikaze drones?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join