Iranian naval ships dock at Syrian Tartus port

Iranian naval ships dock at Syria’s Tartus port: Report

Two Iranian Navy’s ships have docked in the Syrian port of Tartus to provide maritime training to Syria’s naval forces under an agreement signed between Tehran and Damascus a year ago.

The Iranian fleet, consisting of a destroyer and a supply ship, arrived at Tartus port, situated 220 kilometers (136 miles) northwest of the Syrian capital Damascus, on Friday a day after they received permission from the Egyptian armed forces to sail along the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean Sea on their way to the Syrian coast, Mehr News Agency reported on Saturday.

The Iranian ``destroyer`` ain't no real destroyer. It's more like a cruise ship with a few AK-47s...

I'm sure Israel/US would easily sink it... if for say, it began firing from the coast on the Syrian rebels.

reply to post by Vitchilo


a freight container ship with hidden missile containers would be a good idea for Iran.

Maritime training agreement from a year ago? That's rich!

Syria doesn't need maritime training from Iran! Russia has a naval base right there at Tartus!

Sounds more like a joint Iran/Russia "drill" to me, while dropping off some more weapons.

reply to post by Vitchilo


That little ship Jamaran & it's helicopter packs a modest punch, but it's a punch no US naval captain would volunteer to take. Anti submarine torpedoes, anti ship missiles, anti aircraft missiles. A neat, home-grown little ship which does what it says on the tin. It's based on the Vosper Mk5, a old English design, smaller version of the now redundant Royal Navy Type 21 frigate.

Size isn't everything, you know.

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


Seriously? This is what happened to the last Iranian Vosper Mark V that tangled with the US Navy. It hasn't a hope in hells chance if it tried to take on a US asset.



en.wikipedia.org...

Russian assets in the area.

Russian Navy Black Sea Fleet Tanker, Ivan Bubnov, has been anchored off Tartus, Syria for a couple of weeks. She refuelled the Russian carrier Task Force that is now back in Russia.

I've been following Ivan Bubnov as she transmits weather and sea state reports on a regular basis in Morse Code.

Ivan Bubnov

12464 Khz
RCV DE RCJG 99349 10358 22200

34.9N 35.8E Anchored / Hove to

Map Link

Ivan Bubnov has now left Tartus, Syria and is currently hove to off eastern Cyprus as of 18 Feb, 12 GMT.

12464 Khz
RCJG 18121 99358 10348 22200

35.8N 34.8E Anchored / Hove to

Map Link

www.shipspotting.com...

Call sign RCV = Sevastopol, HQ Black Sea Fleet
Call sign RCJG = Ivan Bubnov

www.tuapseport.ru...

reply to post by Deetermined


There is no Russian warships in Tartus, Syria. Even the Amur Class floating repair ship went back to the Black Sea a few weeks ago. All that is in Tartus, Syria is the standard Russian Navy presence of the personnel normally located there to service and supply ships. There are no major Russian warships currently stationed there. The tanker Ivan Bubnov has just departed Tartus and is currently off Cyprus. See my above post ref Ivan Bubnov.

reply to post by tommyjo


I don't disagree.

But if used correctly ... i.e. a surprise attack ... that little Iranian ship & it's helicopter can severely maul most US warships.

Tbh, the OP's article doesn't name either ship. The picture is clearly that of ship Jamaran.

But the BBC report the ship is "destroyer Shahid Qandi", searches online show a Vosper Mark 5 ship with a pennant number 71 for that shipname, but that pennant number would also be the frigate Alvand which did a similar trip up the Suez Canal this year, with the same freighter Kharg.

Eh. I'm not entirely sure now which ship is being referred to in the OP's article.

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


There is confusion in the media at the moment of the identity of the Iranian warship. Previously the Kharg and an Iranian corvette had made a port visit to Saudi Arabia. The media appear to be mixing up the name of the corvette and reporting it as a destroyer.

The warship with the Kharg appears to be the Alvand?

www.uskowioniran.com...

The Suez Canal Authority identifies the Iran Navy ships as IRINS Alvand (71) and IRINS Kharg (431).

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
reply to post by tommyjo

 

I don't disagree.

But if used correctly ... i.e. a surprise attack ... that little Iranian ship & it's helicopter can severely maul most US warships.

A very long shot. It would have to be a hell of a surprise! Any naval asset can get lucky in an engagement, but in the end if the US and Iran naval assets clashed the end results are not going to be in favour of the Iranians.

The Iranian ``destroyer`` ain't no real destroyer. It's more like a cruise ship with a few AK-47s...
I'm sure Israel/US would easily sink it... if for say, it began firing from the coast on the Syrian rebels.

You are wrong on both accounts. Iranian ship is an ok-nothing-special-obsolete-destroyer-that-would-easily-sink-much-larger-WW2-ship-say-heavy-cruiser-using-missilies kind of ship. Few AK-47s that Iranians do not use in any case is not precise description of its military capabilities.
And even if the ship starts spraying Syrian shore and killing scores of Turkish agents trained by Mossad (who are the real rebels according to Assad (who is protecting Zionist regime and not going to get Golan back according to Syrian opposition)) i can promiss you that Israel is not going to do anything unless the war with Iran will start.
So far Israel was not ivolved directly and as far as i noticed - even indirectly - in what goes in Syria ,because Assad is a familiar and incompetent foe while rebels are big unknown who are publicly supported by Hamas.
And this is despite reports that Syrian opposition asked for supplies via some Israeli Druze politicians.
2 Iranian ships are hardly going to really change Israeli actions. Again, unless there will be that crazy war.

reply to post by tommyjo


Aww don't be so argumentative. I never once said this ship ... whatever it is ... was going to change the face of naval warfare in the 21st Century.

All I said was that it was a wee bit more potent than the OP gives credit to, that's all

The facts are simply any lucky hit with modern anti shipping missiles are going to be near fatal for any medium sized boat.
The bigger ships may take a couple to put down, but down they will go if hit with any two anti shipping missiles.
The US fleet is as vilnerable as any other to these airdropped,ship launched,or torpedo boat rammed even anti ship killers.....
What has proven the supposition is the sinking of British ships by the antique Argentine airforce, despite the presence of harrier jets and very good radar detection.
Exocette missile had a range of twenty or so miles, the new gen missiles have multiplyed effective ranges by many times that.....
The Yakhontz is a super sonic missile travelling at mach 2.5 or so.....
2000 mph is a short reaction time for the target even launched at extreme ranges......150 mi....
This means 150/2000 or 10 -12 seconds, from launch tube to target....
think about it..................

IT aint for 'training'...

I bet you any $$ it's for giving them weapons or protection...

Russian Military already has over 4,000 troops their just in case of USA attack.

reply to post by tommyjo


Thanks for the updates!

It's nice to see informative information like this on ATS.

Looking forward to seeing continued updates!

Originally posted by matty1053
IT aint for 'training'...

I bet you any $$ it's for giving them weapons or protection...

Russian Military already has over 4,000 troops their just in case of USA attack.

That is pure hype. Nothing like a good conspiracy. Why not up the number to say 10,000? The Russians have navy personnel at Tartus and a smattering of military advisers. They do not have a permanent base apart from the small naval detachment. It is like the news stories of Russian warships rushed to Syria during October and November 2011 to protect Syria. Pure hype based on dubious news sources. What will it be next? Was the Admiral Kuznetsov Task Force in January delivering tactical nuclear bombs to Syria along with a squadron of MiG-29Ks?

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by tommyjo

 

Thanks for the updates!

It's nice to see informative information like this on ATS.

Looking forward to seeing continued updates!

No problem. Russian Navy Tanker Ivan Bubnov was active again in Morse Code during 12 GMT. Very weak signal but I was able to make out the following. Still anchored up off Cyprus after departing Tartus, Syria.

12464 Khz

RCJG 19121 99358 10348 22200

35.8N 34.8E Anchored / Hove to

Map Link

Iranian navy ships return from Syria through Suez

CAIRO | Tue Feb 21, 2012 5:47am EST (Reuters) - Two Iranian naval ships returned from Syria through the Suez Canal Tuesday, a Suez Canal source said. The ships entered the canal from the Mediterranean Sea early in the morning, heading south toward the Red Sea, and were expected to leave the canal Tuesday afternoon, the source said. The ships had docked at the Syrian port of Tartous, in a show of support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a regional ally of Iran.

www.reuters.com...

Russian Navy Tanker Ivan Bubnov continues to head towards the Black Sea after leaving Syria.

From the Morse Code transmission at 18 GMT, 21 February.

4851 Khz

RCJG 21181 99384 10253

38.4N 25.3E

Map Link

There has been no indication that Iranian ships ever docked in Syrian ports the weekend of Feb. 18 and Feb. 19 and the United States believes that the ships did not dock in Syria, a U.S. Pentagon spokesman said Feb. 21, Reuters reported. The spokesman said there was nothing particularly noteworthy about the latest deployment of the warships.

www.stratfor.com...