Storm In A Teacup, Or Rn Vs. Iran

[Stuart Galbraith]

Last I heard it was something like 22 flyable, which doesnt mean fully operational. They lost one not long ago in a crash.

 

The locally build Phoenix isnt a patch on the original, but a 60nm range Sparrow equivalent still has a lot to commend it.

[Chris Werb]

Last I heard it was something like 22 flyable, which doesnt mean fully operational. They lost one not long ago in a crash.

 

The locally build Phoenix isnt a patch on the original, but a 60nm range Sparrow equivalent still has a lot to commend it.

 

The AIM-54C was a completely different animal and far more capable than its predecessors. It would be interesting (from a purely academic standpoint) to discover which AIM-54 the Iranians had and how good a job they did at reverse-engineering it.

[Stuart Galbraith]

They had Aim 54A. They WERE supplied with some kits under Iran contra to upgrade them in the mid 1980's, but I dont know to what version. There was a number of different rocket motors for it as you know. They also got bomb racks for them, which like the USN, they never really used.

 

From what ive read online, they have basically recreated an Aim54 bodyshell, with some Hawk innards. Which sounds unpromising, but ive listened to an online lecture where an Iranian F14 pilot claimed to have shot down a Mig29 with a Hawk missile that was mated to his F14, and there was I gather some evidence to support his claim. If they can pack the same package in a decent airframe, they might have a capable system. Not as capable as a Phoenix, but you take what you can get, right?

[Josh]

 

Last I heard it was something like 22 flyable, which doesnt mean fully operational. They lost one not long ago in a crash.

 

The locally build Phoenix isnt a patch on the original, but a 60nm range Sparrow equivalent still has a lot to commend it.

 

The AIM-54C was a completely different animal and far more capable than its predecessors. It would be interesting (from a purely academic standpoint) to discover which AIM-54 the Iranians had and how good a job they did at reverse-engineering it.

 

 

Since the AIM-54C didn't come out until the 80's, presumably the Iranians had all 'A's.

 

As for total numbers, the Wikki entry lists over a dozen squadrons of various types of aircraft, of which the MiG-29 is comfortably the most modern. I believe those MiGs were ex Iraqi machines that flew over during ODS. The material condition of all of those aircraft is very suspect. Even Iran's civilian aircraft are very accident prone due to the sanctions making spare parts difficult to find, plus I imagine it is just hard to find parts for F-14s and F-4s anywhere on the market now.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

 

Last I heard it was something like 22 flyable, which doesnt mean fully operational. They lost one not long ago in a crash.

 

The locally build Phoenix isnt a patch on the original, but a 60nm range Sparrow equivalent still has a lot to commend it.

 

The AIM-54C was a completely different animal and far more capable than its predecessors. It would be interesting (from a purely academic standpoint) to discover which AIM-54 the Iranians had and how good a job they did at reverse-engineering it.

 

 

Since the AIM-54C didn't come out until the 80's, presumably the Iranians had all 'A's.

 

As for total numbers, the Wikki entry lists over a dozen squadrons of various types of aircraft, of which the MiG-29 is comfortably the most modern. I believe those MiGs were ex Iraqi machines that flew over during ODS. The material condition of all of those aircraft is very suspect. Even Iran's civilian aircraft are very accident prone due to the sanctions making spare parts difficult to find, plus I imagine it is just hard to find parts for F-14s and F-4s anywhere on the market now.

 

 

 

They did, but as said, they were upgraded, I dont know what to. Perhaps they could have built C's from the upgrade kit?

 

From what ive read from the Tom Cooper book, they actually asked for more upgrade kits than they needed, presumably so they could make missiles themselves. The Americans only gave them a fraction of what they requested.

 

The USN, to ensure the Iranians didnt get anything, shredded any F14's that didnt get in museums to ensure no parts would leak out. Even some of those in museums have had all the instruments stripped out. Happily there seems to be a few that escaped the wanton vandalism. But not many.

 

Thats why im hoping Iran collapses soon. We could do with a few F-14's on the airshow circuit.

Edited August 1, 2019 by Stuart Galbraith

[rmgill]

Why not chain a Warrior down on the focsle and stern area of each particular merchant vessel as an interim defense measure? It works on US gator carriers for bolstering the defensive fit..

 

Run field telephones to the bridge, the other AFV and two wing lookout points.

Edited August 1, 2019 by rmgill

[Stuart Galbraith]

According to Alastair Maclean, there was a board of trade requirement that all British mechant ships had doubler plates on them, so you could mount deck guns. Too bad they let THAT one slide.

[Anixtu]

Why not chain a Warrior down on the focsle and stern area of each particular merchant vessel as an interim defense measure? It works on US gator carriers for bolstering the defensive fit..

 

Run field telephones to the bridge, the other AFV and two wing lookout points.

The deck isn't strengthened for the load of an armoured vehicle. There may not be a suitable open space of the appropriate size. How does Warrior perform in prolonged exposure to a salt spray environment?

 

That was a slightly less sensible suggestion than just bolting on Phalanx. :-)

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

Why not chain a Warrior down on the focsle and stern area of each particular merchant vessel as an interim defense measure? It works on US gator carriers for bolstering the defensive fit..

 

Run field telephones to the bridge, the other AFV and two wing lookout points.

The deck isn't strengthened for the load of an armoured vehicle. There may not be a suitable open space of the appropriate size. How does Warrior perform in prolonged exposure to a salt spray environment?

 

That was a slightly less sensible suggestion than just bolting on Phalanx. :-)

 

 

Badly. Some mandarin at the MOD thought it would be clever bringing them all back from Iraq as deck cargo. However, any savings made were expended when they had to strip them all down to repair the salt corrosion.....

 

That said, there are going to be several hundred turrets going begging when we replace them with 40mm.. Create a new rig based on a iso container, and you might have something thats useful.Although im not sure Id chose to be the one to fire one off when sat on top of a big container stack....

[Roman Alymov]

https://ejmagnier.com/2019/07/31/why-did-the-uk-commander-of-hm-montrose-refrain-from-firing-on-the-irgc-who-in-iran-gave-orders-to-capture-the-stena-impero/

Why did the UK commander of HM Montrose refrain from firing on the IRGC? Who in Iran gave orders to capture the “Stena Impero”

[DB]

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/local-news/royal-navy-frigate-85-run-3157415

[rmgill]

So, the MOD ordered their AFV's without the Undercoat?



More seriously, if the AFV is maintained while it's in the salt environment, would it not be able to kept serviceable vs the stored as deck cargo state given above?

Clean, wash paint, proper service, that's how steel and aluminum items are kept in order whole in salt environments.

[Stuart Galbraith]

So, the MOD ordered their AFV's without the Undercoat?

 

 

More seriously, if the AFV is maintained while it's in the salt environment, would it not be able to kept serviceable vs the stored as deck cargo state given above?

 

Clean, wash paint, proper service, that's how steel and aluminum items are kept in order whole in salt environments.

 

 

 

Warriors were built in the Cold War. I dont think anyone envisaged they would spend their whole life fighting wars in the middle east at the time. Maybe after the next rebuild.

 

You have to remember, these ships would have been coming back on cargo ships, I strongly doubt without any Army servicing crew on board. After all, when you guys shipped shermans, you didnt put an army crew on board to maintain them. You covered them in grease and oil and trusted that they would arrive quickly enough that it wouldnt be an issue. We are all out of the habit of doing things like that now.

 

 

 

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/local-news/royal-navy-frigate-85-run-3157415

 

The sad thing is, they wont be remembered for the dozens of times they got it right, they will be remembered for the sole occasion when there was nothing they could do.

[Panzermann]

You have to remember, these ships would have been coming back on cargo ships, I strongly doubt without any Army servicing crew on board. After all, when you guys shipped shermans, you didnt put an army crew on board to maintain them. You covered them in grease and oil and trusted that they would arrive quickly enough that it wouldnt be an issue. We are all out of the habit of doing things like that now.

​

 

 

And as some retrieved sunk shermans have shown, the grease held up for decades. The MoD could have wrapped them in foil, but nobody thought of that obviously. Or you know, rent a lorry transport ship. A normal car transporter ship won't do. Pennywise, pound foolish.

Edited August 2, 2019 by Panzermann

[Colin]

Tanks sent as deck cargo from the UK in WWII suffered due to poor prep work and were not fit for battle when landed in North Africa. The UK is really good at not learning lessons.

[Chris Werb]

Why not chain a Warrior down on the focsle and stern area of each particular merchant vessel as an interim defense measure? It works on US gator carriers for bolstering the defensive fit..

 

Run field telephones to the bridge, the other AFV and two wing lookout points.

 

In addition to what the others have posted. The Warrior's 30mm is unstabilised and manually traversed (I shit you not!). It fires very slowly, from 3 round manually inserted clips. Your chances of hitting a FIAC with it - even a static one - from a moving ship, would be negligible. Try hitting a moving vehicle with it in Steel Beasts. It's not easy at any sort of range.

[Colin]

It would be cheaper to buy a whole whack of these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dNiOOvHKQ8

[bojan]

 

...The Warrior's 30mm is unstabilised and manually traversed (I shit you not!). It fires very slowly, from 3 round manually inserted clips...

 

Probably the worst IFV turret and armament ever.

[Chris Werb]

 

 

...The Warrior's 30mm is unstabilised and manually traversed (I shit you not!). It fires very slowly, from 3 round manually inserted clips...

 

Probably the worst IFV turret and armament ever.

 

 

No argument there. SB even simulates the gun gradually wandering off zero after the first round! (according to DB this problem was subsequently fixed in the real vehicle)

[Stuart Galbraith]

In fairness, it was only meant to fight from static positions. And if it was any more expensive, it would probably never have been bought at all.

 

There is a really good book called 'Dusty Warriors' by the historian Richard Holmes, describing the deployment of the PWRR to Al Amarah in 2004. They had a really great drill on Salisbury plain called the 118 118 maneuver, which if you have seen the TV advert means you run right through the middle of something leaving mayhem in your wake. The idea was to fire on the move to keep heads down. The only problem was when they got to Iraq, it was apparently rather more bumpy than they expected, and they couldn't hit a barn door. After that they went firm and fired from over-watch.

 

Chris, didnt they get power traverse but kept manual elevation? Or am I thinking of Scimitar?

Edited August 3, 2019 by Stuart Galbraith

[Chris Werb]

Now I have to go and check it out

 

Dusty warriors was an awesome read. I still have my copy. It really tickled me when he praised the resilience of a soldier striding out to a portaloo on a blistering day with a laptop full of porno

[bojan]

...

Chris, didnt they get power traverse but kept manual elevation? Or am I thinking of Scimitar?

Scimitar.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

...

Chris, didnt they get power traverse but kept manual elevation? Or am I thinking of Scimitar?

Scimitar.

 

 

Cheers. Im surprised it didnt get put on both, even allowing for the different turrets.

 

 

Now I have to go and check it out

 

Dusty warriors was an awesome read. I still have my copy. It really tickled me when he praised the resilience of a soldier striding out to a portaloo on a blistering day with a laptop full of porno

Its the best book ive read about British Armoured Infantry in Combat. About the only other one ive found was one about a staffordshire regiment in Operation Granby, which was interesting as far as it went.

 

The bit I remember the most was after the Battle of Danny boy, when the PWRR (rather foolishly in restrospect) removed all the bodies to their base to hand them over to the families (which precipitated numerous legal actions because they assumed they had been executed there). So they put them in the back of a Warrior and the external door button failed. So one poor bugger had to crawl over the (now rapidly decaying) bodies of the Iraqi's to press the internal door button.

Im not surprised he got PTSD, I think anyone would have done after that.

[Stuart Galbraith]

 

You have to remember, these ships would have been coming back on cargo ships, I strongly doubt without any Army servicing crew on board. After all, when you guys shipped shermans, you didnt put an army crew on board to maintain them. You covered them in grease and oil and trusted that they would arrive quickly enough that it wouldnt be an issue. We are all out of the habit of doing things like that now.

​

 

 

And as some retrieved sunk shermans have shown, the grease held up for decades. The MoD could have wrapped them in foil, but nobody thought of that obviously. Or you know, rent a lorry transport ship. A normal car transporter ship won't do. Pennywise, pound foolish.

 

 

They were looking for the cheap option, they got the cheap option.

 

It was probably the same silly bugger that decided the Army could deploy to Oman without engine filters and ended up buggering up 50 tank powerpacks. Penny wise, pound foolish..

[Chris Werb]

 

...

Chris, didnt they get power traverse but kept manual elevation? Or am I thinking of Scimitar?

Scimitar.

 

 

I've just checked in SB (Warrior ODS). It's manual elevation and traverse and the sights wander off target (not the same thing as losing zero, obviously) after each shot. Compare that to the CV9035NL or DK for example. It's like night and day.