Iran's assymetrical navy a "nightmare scenario" for US

Interesting article from Press TV (yeah, it's Iranian) quoting the Washington Post and a US report on Iran's naval capabilities:

www.presstv.ir...

Of particular interest is this passage:

"The Post then expresses fear that the small Iranian vessels can “rapidly deploy” anti-ship mines against hostile ships in the Persian Gulf “or mass in groups to strike large warships from multiple sides at once, like a cloud of wasps attacking much larger prey.”

I do seem to remember that, during the last wargames the US conducted simulating the closure of the Straight of Hormuz by Iran, the US lost one aircraft carrier due to one these "swarm attack" as the US navy calls them.

Of course, there's no point debating who's got the edge here, in terms of technology or fire power - it is undoubtedly the US - but how serious do you think this assymterical threat to the US navy is, in the case of a confrontation in the Straight of Hormuz?

Remember, this is a very narrow patch of water, doted with smalll islands, which Iran is reported to have heavily militarized with surface to sea missile launchers, artillery, fast attack boats, helicopters, etc...with the intent to create a multi-dimensional or 360 degrees threat.

Any thoughts welcome!

It depends what sort of strategy the Iranians would implement. They would know they are at a massive disadvantage when it comes to technology and weaponry. It would certainly not be a push over as the Iranians do have some very damaging weapons themselves. In the region, they could do a lot of damage to the USA and I guess the US naval fleet also.

reply to post by Haknow


well Iran is experienced in long 8 years classical and city wars with Saddam. even at that time USA did intervene just as a supporter of Saddam in the back. you can find limited real confrontations between USA and IRan. while Iran was approximately zero in such confrontations. may be this was because of the failure of operation Eagle Claw that opened the eyes of USA. they are very conservative towards Iran do not look at their propaganda.
without any doubt USA is powerful and even it's air force is stronger than all the Europe !
but what do you feel when Hezbullah that is known to be somehow related to Iran can withstand Israel with all it's technologies. most of experts consider the 33 day war as a model of Iran_USA war. amazingly the merkawa tanks exploded one by one. and they were unable to predict the acts of enemy. and the outcome was nothing.
or you can see Iran controled and downed a stealth drone of USA with least damages and decoded it.
all the technologies have their own weakness and USA is far wiser than Israel.
a confrontation with Iran is economically disaster because of oil. military disaster because of long border of Iran with persian gulf and oman sea. and Iran can simply spread the war towards other american camps in the middleeast. and not to forget the great soft power of Iran in the middle east.
I think USA is wise and conservative enough, not to start ww3.

This seems like wishful thinking on the Iranians part. No navy, army or airforce in the world can even come close to matching U.S millitary superiority. How America uses such power is sometimes questionable, but their ability to wreak utter devestation on an enemy should never be in doubt.

this is exactly Iran's strategy against NATO missile defense to use multitude numbers of multi warhead missiles.

America should be fine, unless of course they decided to try and occupy Iran, in which case, they wont be fine. They will loose, as usual.

Iranian naval capability is overblown. It is in the interests of the Iranian mouth-piece PressTV and others to “big-up” their own military. If there is no military conflict in the Persian Gulf then can tout the view that everyone was too afraid to take them on, rather than the truth that no one can really be bothered to take them on.

Not wishing to burst the fantasy, but the Iranian navy is just not in the same league as the US or any possible modern combatant they may have the misfortune to tangle with. I would include (by the way) their neighbours across the sea in Saudi Arabia and even Oman who have more modern naval sea and air assets.

Look to history of equivalent navies tangling with the West.

The use of sea mines in the Persian Gulf has happened in the past and doubtless the Iranians could resort to such tactics again if they had a death wish. However, mining the Straits of Hormuz or anywhere else is rather hit and miss. It would not destroy the Western navies in the Persian Gulf. It would motivate them and other Middle Eastern nations into the type of reprisals Iran would rather not want to see.

So long as Iran just keeps it to a war of words then no harm will be done to them.

Regards

Guerrilla tactics, which is what this essentially boils down to, are the way to hold off the US in war. The US has NEVER had success against guerrilla tactics.

Any navy that goes head to head with the us navy that isn't asymmetrical will soon be...

Regarding Irans "assymetrical" navy,

I can see a "nighmare scenario" where our US Sailors would be really busy plucking Iranian sailors out of the water for days and weeks.

reply to post by paraphi



Thanks for your insights.

However, I don't think anyone is saying Iran's navy is within the same league as the US. Clearly, this isn't the case.

The question asked by the report linked in the OP is whether Iran, despite having a significantly less advanced navy and armed forces, has managed to develop effective counter-tactics to face the US in the event of a conflict.

Specifically, the report highlights the threat to aircraft carriers stemming from"360 degrees threat environment": that is, what happens when an aircraft carrier is surrounded by hundreds of fast-attack boats mounted with missile launchers, artillery fire coming from small islands, helicopter gunship fire and mini-subs (which is, apparently, the Iranian game plan)?

During the last wargames conducted by the US in the Persian Gulf simulating the closure of the Straight of Hormuz, the US navy apparently lost a carrier playing this scenario.

We must also take into account that the Iranian Navy is not alone anymore...

rpdefense.over-blog.com...

news.antiwar.com...

With a significant contingent of russian and chinese warships now in the area, it is hard to say what would happen if an incident occurred in the Straight of Hormuz.

This, and new variations that can engage targets 'under the horizon', are why the swarm tactics would be a very poor idea for Iran to use...

Phalanx CIWS

Also, I believe there is a man-portable system called the Mk-45 that was developed after the incident with the USS Cole (DDG-67) to also account for small, fast moving incoming hostile craft. When I deployed to the Med in '04, the DD is was on had four of these Mk-45, while the recently repaired Cole, also in the same battlegroup, had eight Mk-45's on deck.

Any 'navy' that goes agains the US Navy in a blue water fight will be thoroughly trounced. Only the Russian fleet would stand a chance.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Thanks for this.

You're a correct that, in most unconventional engagements , the US has failed to gain the advantage: the campaigns in Vietnam and Afghanistan, in particular, have shown some of the weaknesses of US military doctrine and structure.

For some years now, multiple reforms of the armed forces and its doctrines have attempted to address those weaknesses, notably by boosting the number of special forces, relying on local forces to fight unconventional engagements, and enhancing mobility and flexibility. This was the essence of Gen. McChrystal's doctrine in Afghanistan...and it sort of worked in Iraq.

But this mainly concerns ground forces. As far as I am aware, the US navy hasn't prepared for unconventional engagements at sea...(correction - apparently, as per Dreine's contribution, the US has tried to learn from the Cole incident and equipped some of its ship with the MK 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapons System to counter against such threats...It remains to be seen how effective these are, however, under real combat conditions).

reply to post by Haknow


USA is far conservative, I can not remember it has involved in such wars. Iraq was crippled by sanctions and Saddam had no support from people and US was aware of the situation in Iraq. Afghanistan had no central government. Ghazafi had no people support moreover the role of Nato was to attack and go by their fighters.
approximately all of them were someday alleies of US and it has enough knowledge of them.

To openly state your plan of attack is completely foolish.

Iran has no chance to defeat the US with swarm attacks etc., the kinds of weapons the US navy has can destroy anything Iran has from far away.

Yes, the US might lose a ship or two, but the Iranian navy would be completely obliterated in the process.

I hope Iran is able to hold their own against the bully!!

reply to post by fedeykin


I don't think Iran is disclosing its plans. If you read the report, you will notice it actually comes from the US. It is the US navy, and defense think tanks in Washington, that are debating what threat, if any, does the Iranian Navy and its probable tactics, pose to the US navy.

I would tend to agree, though, that I cannot see the Iranian sustaining a long-term engagement with the US navy. Even it it were able to inflict significant damage to one ship or more - which I believe it can - the US's advanced targeting systems, anti-ship missiles and guns coupled with air support would, in my view, prove impossible for Iran's navy to withstand or even avoid.

But I'm sure the Iranian navy has thought about that.

The question, therefore, becomes strategic rather than tactical. It is not whether the Iranian navy can defeat the US navy in the straight of Hormuz, but rather what role would the Iranian navy play within a broader conflict with the US and its allies?

In my view, there are probably two main options for the Iranians in this respect: one is to restrict the US navy's ability to manoeuver within the straight and to launch and support air/ground operations within Iran. The US relies heavily on its navy for its major operations and so, by creating a threatening envrionment, the Iranians could potentially impair and degrade the US's strike power.

The second option is to aim for a psychological effect by targetting "en masse" and, hopefully, sinking an aircraft carrier or another high-value symbolic target, to inflict trauma upon the enemy and boost the morale of Iranian forces. This would probably be a "last chance" scenario though.

Can the Iranians hold their own? I hope so, because I don't think it's in the world interest for the US to topple and destroy yet another middle eastern country.

Originally posted by howmuch4another
Any navy that goes head to head with the us navy that isn't asymmetrical will soon be...

Regarding Irans "assymetrical" navy,

I can see a "nighmare scenario" where our US Sailors would be really busy plucking Iranian sailors out of the water for days and weeks.

The Iranians would have a strategic plan against the USA like any smart country would. The USA are what Iran have been waiting for also apparently. They have dropped a drone, have a formidable army and it only makes me wonder what we haven't seen on their behalf. Don't shrug them off as easy beats, they would of learnt a lot from the wars around them over the past 10 years.

Originally posted by Haknow
reply to post by paraphi

 

Thanks for your insights.

However, I don't think anyone is saying Iran's navy is within the same league as the US. Clearly, this isn't the case.

The question asked by the report linked in the OP is whether Iran, despite having a significantly less advanced navy and armed forces, has managed to develop effective counter-tactics to face the US in the event of a conflict.

There is one simple answer to what you asked above. Look at it this way. Iran have one enemy in this world who stands above everyone else. They prepare for that conflict and that conflict only. Ahmadenijad has stated in an interview that Iran does not even recognise Israel in their defense doctrine. So they are not prepping for Israel. They are waiting for the USA... They might not be ready, but they will certainly have an effective way to defend their country if they are attacked.

Originally posted by Atzil321
This seems like wishful thinking on the Iranians part. No navy, army or airforce in the world can even come close to matching U.S millitary superiority. How America uses such power is sometimes questionable, but their ability to wreak utter devestation on an enemy should never be in doubt.

Ah yes but underestimating your enemy is what will ruin America. And just because no single enemy can stand up to America, doesn't mean combined forces couldn't do the same thing.

Remember America is the smug kid in the playground, the rich kid with all the equipment. Other, wiser, older, countries are watching it from afar thinking 'you might have the equipment, but you don't seem to be winning many wars'

There's a great British army joke about the US military and it's something like 'all the gear, no idea'.

www.iiss.org...

A decent link detailing how Iran could control the Hormuz.

Mines seem to be the cheapest tactic, as would swarm-type hit and run tactics.