What are Iranian capabilities ?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by buster2010

 

Numbers have a way of leading to a false sense of security. Like I've been saying all thread, if you don't have the training, you aren't going to pull it off. And in some cases even if you do, you aren't going to pull it off. Iran would have a hard time getting to Israel either by land, by air, or by sea.

edit on 8/28/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

What makes you think they don't have the training? Iran's military tactics are based on American combat tactics not Soviet and they have the best trained pilots in the region.

reply to post by buster2010


As of March of this year it was reported that their pilots were averaging one sortie a day, naval forces would get more training, but probably not a lot more at sea time. Their tactics are also primarily for a short range war, not long distance power projection. They're working on improving that for their air force, but it takes time and practice. As for their navy, have you looked at the breakdown on types that could reach Israel?

They have (not counting the submarines):

Three inactive destroyers (two Sumner class built in the 70s, and one Battle class, built in the 1940s)
Five frigates in the 1500 ton range (to give you an idea of how small that is, an Arleigh Burke class destroyer displaces over 6500 tons with a standard load, and between 8400 and 9400 depending on flight with a full load).
Three corvettes (which haven't been used in the west in a long time), between 580 and 1100 tons displacement.

Everything else is designed for close in work near their home ports (missile boats, coastal patrol craft, and support vessels).

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Numbers have a way of leading to a false sense of security. Like I've been saying all thread, if you don't have the training, you aren't going to pull it off.

Agreed – the importance of training is so often overlooked, as is military doctrine and leadership. Also a direct comparison of numbers without considering capability is also misleading.

If, by some fluke the Iranian air force appeared above Tel Aviv, would they drop precision guided bombs and get the job done in one visit, or would they have to continuously return to achieve their objectives?

Regards

reply to post by deviant300


What worries me is if Iran decided to block the straight of Hormuz,through which most of the oil from the gulf is shipped.
Its only 39km wide at its narrow point,and could be heavily mined by Iran if SHTF,which would result in oil tankers blowing up and sinking-do that to a few tankers-then the rest have to wait until the whole problem is solved.

If that takes more than a few days,we are screwed-I know in the UK the government step in and take over ALL fuel depots and garages if they stop getting enough oil.

Anarchy/martial law would break out in less than a week if the straight of hormuz is blocked/mined.



Would Iran do this if they saw a western attack on Syria?
I doubt it-but I think they would if they became involved in a wider conflict(which could begin with Syria being attacked).

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Numbers have a way of leading to a false sense of security. Like I've been saying all thread, if you don't have the training, you aren't going to pull it off.

Agreed – the importance of training is so often overlooked, as is military doctrine and leadership. Also a direct comparison of numbers without considering capability is also misleading.

If, by some fluke the Iranian air force appeared above Tel Aviv, would they drop precision guided bombs and get the job done in one visit, or would they have to continuously return to achieve their objectives?

Regards

I do not see how they would ever get through the US/GCC integrated air defense to get as far as Isreal. Not only are not capable of large scale sorties the have no airborne command and control or secure communication. They would on a WW2 style bombing run up against better trained pilots in better planes in greater numbers.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


However doesn't most of our oil come from the North Sea ?

reply to post by deviant300


Thats true,we only get a few % from the middle east these days,so we would be relativley unaffected if Iran blocked hormuz.Oil prices will no doubt rise anyways.
Other countries may not get off as lightly though.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


Iran mined the Gulf back in about 88 or 89 resulting in the damage of a US warship. They lost several platforms, and at least one destroyer class ship I believe it was in return.

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The only way Iran attacks Israel is with missile strikes. They don't have the capabilities or the training to take them on with airstrikes, or ground attacks.

This is 100% correct. Iran would have to try and hit population centers like Iraq did during Desert Storm. Its missles lack accuracy for anythhing more. Its airforce would be completely out classed by GCC air craft. Irans other option is to mine the gullf something everyone is prepared for.

No that is 100% wrong. People seem to forget Iran has a naval force as well one that can just sit off Israels shore and pound them from a distance. If you look at the numbers Iran can easily take Israel.

None of that matters since israel has newks n us backing

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
reply to post by deviant300

 

What worries me is if Iran decided to block the straight of Hormuz,through which most of the oil from the gulf is shipped.
Its only 39km wide at its narrow point,and could be heavily mined by Iran if SHTF,which would result in oil tankers blowing up and sinking-do that to a few tankers-then the rest have to wait until the whole problem is solved.

If that takes more than a few days,we are screwed-I know in the UK the government step in and take over ALL fuel depots and garages if they stop getting enough oil.

Anarchy/martial law would break out in less than a week if the straight of hormuz is blocked/mined.

Would Iran do this if they saw a western attack on Syria?
I doubt it-but I think they would if they became involved in a wider conflict(which could begin with Syria being attacked).

Iran has a boatload of Exocet, Sunburn, and Oniks Anti-Ship Missiles. Just think, once they've mined the Strait, then they can kickback and wait for the minesweepers and screening vessels to enter. Then it's just a turkey shoot.

Originally posted by WepsHCS

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
reply to post by deviant300

 

What worries me is if Iran decided to block the straight of Hormuz,through which most of the oil from the gulf is shipped.
Its only 39km wide at its narrow point,and could be heavily mined by Iran if SHTF,which would result in oil tankers blowing up and sinking-do that to a few tankers-then the rest have to wait until the whole problem is solved.

If that takes more than a few days,we are screwed-I know in the UK the government step in and take over ALL fuel depots and garages if they stop getting enough oil.

Anarchy/martial law would break out in less than a week if the straight of hormuz is blocked/mined.

Would Iran do this if they saw a western attack on Syria?
I doubt it-but I think they would if they became involved in a wider conflict(which could begin with Syria being attacked).

Iran has a boatload of Exocet, Sunburn, and Oniks Anti-Ship Missiles. Just think, once they've mined the Strait, then they can kickback and wait for the minesweepers and screening vessels to enter. Then it's just a turkey shoot.

If it was remotely that easy they would have done it long ago. As it is they would be hiding everything they had to avoid cruise missles, bombers and drones.

reply to post by WepsHCS


Now that SeaRAM is operational it won't be nearly as ray as you think.

reply to post by buster2010


Thanks for posting that graph. I have used this site before. But in looking it over I wonder how accurate it really is. I'm not questioning whether or not a side by side comparison is worthwhile, but some of the numbers are really misleading where others I just can't quite believe. This may be because of my own ignorance and I stand ready to be corrected on any of my observations. I'm not trying to be the voice of authority here.

For example, Israel has 2,895 tanks and Iran has 3,870. At first glance this looks decisive, but I have to wonder how tanks could be brought to bear. Tehran and Tel Aviv are 1,000 miles from each other. I'm thinking maybe the Israeli tanks are going to stay in Israel, though they could venture across the border into Syria or Lebanon, and the Iranian tanks are going to stay in Iran and not venture anywhere. So the fact that Iran has more tanks doesn't really matter.

And there is a quality issue here. During both Gulf Wars the American Abrams M-1 tanks dominated while the Iraqi tank crews jumped out of their tanks and ran away. How much of this is training and command and control and how much is quality of product I can't say, but there is an obvious difference.

But my second issue puzzles me even more. The chart shows the Iranian Air Force as having over 1800 aircraft vs. the Israelis with over 600. Where did they get these numbers? When you get to specifics, the Iranians have

26 F-14
28 Mig-29
5 Mirage F-1
28 F-4
20 F-5

and maybe a half dozen of their own home-grown fighters. For transport tanker type aircraft they have 4 707s, and 45 C-130s. Most of their stuff is from 1970s or earlier. I'm just not seeing where they have 1800 aircraft, even if they might still have the P-47 Thunderbolts.

The Israeli air force has 77 F-15s, and 342 F-16s. They have a handful of transport aircraft. These are wiki numbers, but they are documented with footnotes for the source material. The globalfirepower numbers are much less well documented, but list wiki as one of their sources along with "The Library of Congress" and "CIA World factbook." So there is some overlap of source material, but I have to give an edge to the wiki numbers here because they are much better documented.

So what we really have here is an Iranian air force where over half the fighters are aging F-4, F-5, and F-14s for which they cannot get parts or must manufacture them themselves, versus several hundred F-15/F-16s. As an attacking force that has to travel 1,000 miles before they can be over their targets. Oh, and then there's Saudi Arabia in the middle here, with nearly 1,000 aircraft of their own, including about 150 F-15s, which has been agitating for the US to intervene in Syria.

So despite Iran's greater overall numbers, I don't see this superiority as being terribly meaningful here.

reply to post by schuyler


I'll sit down later and do a more comprehensive OOB later, but that counts everything that flies under aircraft. So their F-27s, P-3s, Il-76s are all included. And that is why it's so misleading.

I think the real answer lies in why the obsession to gain access to Iran's technology.

Iran is no push over and there are some good threads here detailing that. The main thing is, Iran is a regional Super-Power, but regional is the key. They have a great air force for defense....in that region. They have a great Navy, if one considers it's largely built for just one purpose. Battle for control of the Hormuz Strait.

Countries like us built force to do everything well, and we spend more than the next several nations COMBINED to do it.

Iran specialized in two major areas. Logically, I'd say. Missiles and anti-air defense in a deviously decentralized system, given the doctrine they model after.

The biggest issue is, this is no Iraq. This is more like Israel in one Key area. Iran buys weapons out of convenience, not need. They have an advanced and mature domestic military production system that plugs away 365/yr and has been since 1979.

Just to add some fun for planners? Their nation is nearly 1/3rd ours for area (BIG) and they dig like moles on some industry.

The only truly HONEST answer to 'what do they have'? No one knows with certainty and we'll all learn at about the same time.

Originally posted by hurdygurdy
I think the real answer lies in why the obsession to gain access to Iran's technology.

edit on 28-8-2013 by hurdygurdy because: (no reason given)

Ah, I see you edited out your contention that Iranian scientists were the best in the world. I was going to ask you how you determined that. But for what remains of your original post, I don't think the issue is access as much as it is knowledge. A nation would be derelict in its duty if it did not want to determine the capabilities of its enemies. In other words, there ought to be an obsession with that. It's in your best interests to learn what you can.

Just to be speculative on an example. If the Iranians have an ICBM with nuclear capability that can reach the eastern seaboard of the United States and cities such as New York and Washington, DC., I would expect our intelligence to be obsessive about learning of this, obsessive about learning where those missiles are, and obsessive in developing a deterrent to take them out. Being obsessive is a very good thing when your life is at stake.

In other words, neither we nor the Israelis need access to Iranian technology; ours is better. We just need to know what it is so that we can properly prepare. If our intelligence is not obsessive about it, then get those guys out of there and get some people in who are.

reply to post by schuyler


As promised, here's an open source OoB for the Iranian military.

Air Force:
Combat aircraft:
McDonnell Douglas F-4D/E/RF-4E 28
Northrop F-5E 20
Chengdu F-6 (Chinese MiG-19) 18
Chengdu F-7 (Chinese MiG-21) 17
Grumman F-14 26
MiG-29 16
Mirage F1 5
Sukhoi Su-24 27
Total: 157

Special Mission:
Boeing 707(EW) 1
Lockheed Martin P-3F 5
Total: 6

Tanker:
Boeing 707 1
Boeing 747 3
Total: 4

Transport:
Boeing 707 2
Boeing 747 4
Lockheed Martin C-130E/H 45
Fokker F27 12
Ilyushin Il-76 5
Pilatus PC-6 13
Turbo Commander 3
Total: 84

Training/Helicopters:
Northrop F-5F 10
Chengdu FT-7 (trainer version of the F-7) 4
Pilatus PC-7 35
Total: 49

Army:
Transport:
Fokker F27 2
Turbo Commander 5
Total: 7

Combat Helicopter:
Bell AH-1J 6
Bell 206 3
Boeing CH-47C 15
Mil Mi-8/17 6
Total: 30

Navy:
Transport:
Fokker F27 4
Total: 4

Combat Helicopters:
ASH-3D 10
Bell 412 4
Sikorsky RH-53 3
Total: 17

Revolutionary Guard:
Combat Aircraft:
Sukhoi Su-25 13
Total: 13

Transport:
Antonov AN-74 9
Falcon 20 1
Ilyushin Il-76 3
Harbin Y-12 8
Total: 21

Combat Helicopters:
Mil Mi-171 38
Total: 38

Training aircraft:
Embraer EMB-312 13
Total: 13

Total aircraft: 443
Air Forces information taken from the FlightGlobal.com Air Forces of the World 2013 database.

Ships (as of 2012):
Submarines:
Kilo class 2,325 tons 3
Nahang class 350 tons 1
Ghadir/Yono class 120 tons 11+
Yugo class 90 tons 0
Al Sabehat 15 class 10 tons 5

Frigates:
Mowi/Zolfagar class 1,400 tons 1
Alvand class 1,250 tons 2

Corvettes:
Bavandor class 900 tons 1

Fast Attack Craft:
Sina class 249 tons 3
Kaman class 249 tons 7
Thondar class 249 tons 10

Offshore Patrol:
Bakhtaran class 447 tons 8
Parvin class 102 tons 3
Swift MkIII class 28 tons 9
Peterson class 22 tons 6
Swift MkII class 22 tons 6

Fast inshore patrol:
Zafar 82 tons 6
IPS-18 Tir 28 tons 10
MIG-G-1900 28 tons 10
China Cat 19 tons 9
IPS-16 14 tons 15

Fast patrol craft:
Boghammar 6.4 tons 35
Kajami 5 tons 6
Misc. Small craft 5-10 tons 200+

Much more can be found here, sorry, but my hands are tired from the typing.

So much for the idea that Iran has 1,858 aircraft.

reply to post by schuyler


Keep in mind this is open source. They also left off the Shahab, which they only have a few (like 3-5 I think), but that should be pretty close.