Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Flying boats: The new terror of the sea?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Flying boats: The new terror of the sea?
    Posted: 11-Mar-2007 at 12:02
I dunno if AWACs could detect these as well as they detect a large metallic destroyer or even patrol boat. For one thing the body can be made entirely of fiberglass so no blip there. Then the prop can easily be painted with radar absorbing paint and the motor can also be shielded similarly.

Also since these only cost $5000 or so to buy then it wouldn't be that hard to rig up 1000 of them where about 900 are unmanned decoys that home in on targets while 100 of them might have, optionally, special forces at the helm. This would draw out a lot of wasted missiles.  $10 million could buy the exaustion of 2000 precision missiles of the USN.

Also 20 or so could be rigged with pricier SAMs designed to launch if they detect fighters on the horizon.
Back to Top
think View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 435
  Quote think Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 02:58
Interesting. I heard from a reliable accompliance that the Iranians have been considering arming up legions of camels so they can be used as Missile platforms. The Americans/Israelis should be ready to counter all sorts of advanced tech.
Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933
  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 08:35
Originally posted by think

I heard from a reliable accompliance that the Iranians have been considering arming up legions of camels...
 
I heard that think won't be a member at AE for long. Wink
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 10:26
Iran dose not really need flying boats for kamikazi missions. More effective will be the subs, the kilos. Granted they are pretty low tech suiff, but in shallow waters, with lots of ambient noise will be a BIG threat.
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 13:58
Iran only has 2 or 3 Kilo subs. And I would bet that Navy seals have plastered sonar sensors in every square mile of the persian gulf which is quite shallow and sub-unfriendly to begin with. I think if war did break out all three of those subs would be sunk in less than an hour. The only way they could possibly survive is by staying in the gulf of oman, and I am sure the USN has made it their top job to litter key points there with sensors as well. 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 14:05
Sub hunting is a pretty impricse art. In the falklands the Argentine WWII era sub managed to elude the entire Royal navy.
Back to Top
aghart View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 05-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 232
  Quote aghart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 17:29
Originally posted by Sparten

Sub hunting is a pretty impricse art. In the falklands the Argentine WWII era sub managed to elude the entire Royal navy.
And how many British Ships did they sink?  "NONE"
Former Tank Commander (Chieftain)& remember, Change is inevitable!!! except from vending machines
Back to Top
aghart View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 05-Sep-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 232
  Quote aghart Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 17:45
Originally posted by maqsad

I dunno if AWACs could detect these as well as they detect a large metallic destroyer or even patrol boat. For one thing the body can be made entirely of fiberglass so no blip there. Then the prop can easily be painted with radar absorbing paint and the motor can also be shielded similarly.

Also since these only cost $5000 or so to buy then it wouldn't be that hard to rig up 1000 of them where about 900 are unmanned decoys that home in on targets while 100 of them might have, optionally, special forces at the helm. This would draw out a lot of wasted missiles.  $10 million could buy the exaustion of 2000 precision missiles of the USN.

Also 20 or so could be rigged with pricier SAMs designed to launch if they detect fighters on the horizon.
 
Please Please join Osma ban Laden.  Your idea's are great until the US Navy sends it['s F14 Tomcats to investigate and then allows them "free time" to practice using their aircraft mounted cannons to totally destroy the easy targets presented to them.  The Iranians like the Iraq's would be difficult to fight when they use non conventional  (terrorist )weapons but in a conventional war the US would not even break into a sweat. I include these "stupid" (and stupid is the correct description) suicide weapons  as conventional weapons.  My military experience is limited to Armoured warfare and I know the limitations of my experience, but some of you lot have been reading far too many comics and maybe should stick to comics! 
Former Tank Commander (Chieftain)& remember, Change is inevitable!!! except from vending machines
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 17:49
The Argentine naval war took place in the south atlantic ocean. By comparison the Persian gulf is like a bathtub. There is no comparison. The US navy has been playing cat and mouse games with the soviet navy all throughout the cold war in every ocean of the world. Iran is just getting started, I seriously doubt Iranian subs will be able to survive more than a few hours in the Persian gulf. The arabian sea...maybe but I am convinced personally that the top priority of the US navy has been to swarm the coastline around Iran with sensors.

This is why I think the lunatic like kamikaze attacks would be very effective as a deterrence. Its sheer insanity for a country like Iran to take on the US and expect to survive intact for very long. However, its also pretty close to lunacy for the USN to have half its ships sunk and all its bases turned to rubble as well when it does not have to be that way. Those three Kilo subs could be sunk within hours...its just 3 subs remember. But 10,000 flying boats of which 9,000 or more are unmanned remotely operating or auto operating drones would create a logistical nightmare for the US to deal with. How do you deal with a swarm attack of 10,000 amphibious contraptions of which 9,000 are unmanned decoys? Does the US even have 10,000 missiles? Can you imagine how many fighter jets will have to be sent ahead to try and take these out...and how many missiles can each fighter carry anyway? 20 max? And each one of those aircraft would be highly vulnerable to SAM attack. I initially thought these boats were a bit of a joke but the more I think about it, the more useful these boats can be to a technologically disadvantaged navy like Iran's.
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Mar-2007 at 18:00
Originally posted by aghart

 
Please Please join Osma ban Laden.  Your idea's are great until the US Navy sends it['s F14 Tomcats to investigate and then allows them "free time" to practice using their aircraft mounted cannons to totally destroy the easy targets presented to them.  The Iranians like the Iraq's would be difficult to fight when they use non conventional  (terrorist )weapons but in a conventional war the US would not even break into a sweat. I include these "stupid" (and stupid is the correct description) suicide weapons  as conventional weapons.  My military experience is limited to Armoured warfare and I know the limitations of my experience, but some of you lot have been reading far too many comics and maybe should stick to comics! 


I don't see what Osama Bin Ladin has to do with any of this? War itself is "suicide" to begin with for the defender when you have a nation like Iran or Iraq pitted against the US. And if the US pits itself against an equal oponent(as if thats likely) then the casualty rate can be considered "suicidal" by some. But do tell me, how many tomcats would be needed to take out a swarm attack of 10,000 flying boats simultaneously closing in at 100 knots? 9,000 of these boats would be unmanned decoys while up to 1000 would be manned by special forces who have SAM missiles with BVR capability ready to fire at any sign of an "investigation".  Also, the special ops could just slip under water and wait to be rescued or grab a working drone to run back to their base. It doesn't have to be a "martyr" operation at all.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.158 seconds.