Iran Tests New 300km Anti-Ship Missile

[eaf-f16]

Here's an excerpt from a New York Times article about it.

TEHRAN — Iran warned Monday that it could easily close a critical Persian Gulf waterway for oil shipments and claimed possession of a new long-range naval weapon that could sink enemy ships nearly 200 miles away.

It was unclear what provoked the warning, made by Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, but it followed the weekend expiration of an informal deadline for Iran to respond to incentives from world powers to curb its uranium enrichment activities. The United States, which has warships deployed in the Persian Gulf, has said new sanctions should be imposed on Iran for failing to respond to the deadline.

The Iranian warning coincided with word that Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, spoke by phone on Monday with the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Javier Solana. Mr. Solana was expected to report back on the conversation to the representatives of the six countries — the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany — that are leading the demands that Iran stop enriching uranium, Agence France-Presse reported.

In comments carried by the semiofficial Iranian news agency Fars, Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, said that Iran was capable of imposing “unlimited controls” at the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, an important international oil route.

“Closing the Strait of Hormuz for an unlimited period of time would be very easy,” he was quoted as saying.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Here's an excerpt from a New York Times article about it.

Just more bluster to reemphasize the economic threat to Gulf Shipping while the USA and Iran negotiate over Iraq and the nuke program. These guys "test" some new weapon that is going to change things about twice a week. Just the usual propaganda and nothing special...YAWN


-DA

 

[Grand Danois]

Just more bluster to reemphasize the economic threat to Gulf Shipping while the USA and Iran negotiate over Iraq and the nuke program. These guys "test" some new weapon that is going to change things about twice a week. Just the usual propaganda and nothing special...YAWN


-DA

Actually it underlines how little Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, expects hostilities to break out, lest he will look as Comical Ali II overnight.

 

[tphuang]

Actually it underlines how little Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, expects hostilities to break out, lest he will look as Comical Ali II overnight.

at this point, I'd just like to know what is this "new missile" that Iran is testing.

 

[AegisFC]

What do the Iranians have that can spot or provide good enough targeting data on a ship 200 miles away?

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Eeshaan]

Isn't this new Iranian missle completely indegenous ? It's supposed to be made with entirely new, Iranian technology, but I really doubt that Iran will be able to defeat both USA & Israel and control the strait of Hormuj for an unlimited time.

Israel and USA have the upper hand in terms of reconnaisance, sattelite imagery & aerial recconaisance etc.. Thats for sure. Iran dosen't have anything that can match the targetting data resources of USA & Israel. Going to make it a VERY hard fight for Iran, if hostilities ensue, even with it's new Shahab-3 + new anti-ship missle.

And let's not forget the missle-defense systems like 'Arrow" and patriot.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[eaf-f16]

I don't know why everyone still thinks the Iranian ballistics missile threat is significant.

Can PAC-3 stop 2,000km range ballistics missiles? If it can, then what's the worry? And even if it can't, can it land on anything accurately and cause significant and lasting damage? I doubt it.

What's going the harm the US badly, is what they're capable of doing in the Strait and the political consequences of attacking Iran. This is what should be worrying.

Just more bluster to reemphasize the economic threat to Gulf Shipping while the USA and Iran negotiate over Iraq and the nuke program. These guys "test" some new weapon that is going to change things about twice a week. Just the usual propaganda and nothing special...YAWN


-DA

The the "freeze-for-freeze" talks broke down a few days ago. So, unless you consider threats of sanctions to be negotiations...

AFAIK, they aren't talking about Iraq with the US anymore. I think they're doing it directly with the Iraqi government. Or maybe not at all.

Actually it underlines how little Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, expects hostilities to break out, lest he will look as Comical Ali II overnight.

I think it's unwise to assume that they're lying. It's not like they were lying when they said they developed the Shahab-3, were they?

 

[DarthAmerica]

The the "freeze-for-freeze" talks broke down a few days ago. So, unless you consider threats of sanctions to be negotiations...

AFAIK, they aren't talking about Iraq with the US anymore. I think they're doing it directly with the Iraqi government. Or maybe not at all.

Both of these assertions are incorrect and threatening sanctions are negotiation tactics. As is the threat of war.

-DA

 

[SABRE]

Here's an excerpt from a New York Times article about it.

It appears to me as just another Bluff and Conventional-Deterrence game. Less of a deterrence (more like inviting trouble) and more of a bluff.

 

[DarthAmerica]

It appears to me as just another Bluff and Conventional-Deterrence game. Less of a deterrence (more like inviting trouble) and more of a bluff.

It is and until a final settlement on Iraq and the nuclear issue are reached you will read things like this as both the USA and Iran work out the details. I just hope the diplomats on both sides are smart enough to work this out.

-DA

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Viktor]

I don't know why everyone still thinks the Iranian ballistics missile threat is significant.

And why dont you?

Can PAC-3 stop 2,000km range ballistics missiles?

No.

If it can, then what's the worry?

Even if it could its not able to stop swarms of it.

And even if it can't, can it land on anything accurately and cause significant and lasting damage? I doubt it.

Dont doubt it. Western powers watched and measured accuracy of Iranian missiles during its excercises and its CEP have being improved so mutch accuracy is not the issue any more.

What's going the harm the US badly, is what they're capable of doing in the Strait and the political consequences of attacking Iran. This is what should be worrying.

Hezbollah had 15 000 missiles at least during its fight with Israel. What do you thing how many of them Iran has and dont you thing 150 000 US troops in Iraq standing there in huuudge unprotected bases (from this menace at least) make ideal detterance. No force in the world has capability to defende against mass balistic missile tactics. And thats not the only thing or detterence Iran is capable of doing.

The the "freeze-for-freeze" talks broke down a few days ago. So, unless you consider threats of sanctions to be negotiations...

Sanctions will do nothing ... Iran is under sanctions from 1979 .. and they dont even care ...

 

[eaf-f16]

Both of these assertions are incorrect and threatening sanctions are negotiation tactics. As is the threat of war.

-DA

The US and Iran aren't in negotiations over the nuclear issue. One US envoy attending a single meeting between Iran and the EU's foreign policy chief doesn't mean negotiations. I think that was done mostly to encourage Iran to co-operate and to show them that there was a real advantage in doing so.

Here's an excerpt from another NY Times article about the US envoy that was sent.

The officials emphasized that Mr. Burns’s participation was a one-time decision, that he would not meet one-on-one with Mr. Jalili and that he would reiterate the administration’s demand that Iran suspend uranium enrichment.

The Bush administration's policy so far is that it won't negotiate unless Iran suspends Uranium enrichment. It made this pretty clear. Whether it will change this in the future remains unknown (and the window of opportunity is closing). But so far, negotiations between the US and Iran over the nuclear issue haven't happened. At least not to my knowledge.

Also, I'm unaware of any recent talks between the US and Iran about Iraq's security. So, if you can give me a link or something about talks on Iraq, I would greatly appreciate it.

I honestly don't know why Iran chose to announce the missile test now. It could be in response to Ehud Barak's recent calls for the US to maintain the military option against Iran, it could have been in response to the threat of sanctions (that doesn't make sense, though), or (most likely) this was a true leap forward in capability for Iran's military establishment.

 

[kato]

tphuang: YJ-82 or Noor with enlarged tank for the turbojet?

First thing that comes to mind, offhand. Noor was claimed with similar high range, 200 km. Presumably, the YJ-82 guidance package (inertial autopilot + terminal active seeker) could be reused. Giving it a larger fuel tank wouldn't be that far-fetched in Iranian capabilities - China has the YJ-83 variant with claimed 180-250 km range, YJ-82A also has ~180 km claimed range.

 

[DarthAmerica]

The US and Iran aren't in negotiations over the nuclear issue. One US envoy attending a single meeting between Iran and the EU's foreign policy chief doesn't mean negotiations. I think that was done mostly to encourage Iran to co-operate and to show them that there was a real advantage in doing so.

Here's an excerpt from another NY Times article about the US envoy that was sent.

You are mistaken, negotiations are ongoing and at very high levels. If all you have is OSINT you may not know what to look for. It isn't very public because of sensibilities in both countries but I assure you it is happening as we speak. Believe me, when it stops, you will know...

-DA

 

[tphuang]

tphuang: YJ-82 or Noor with enlarged tank for the turbojet?

First thing that comes to mind, offhand. Noor was claimed with similar high range, 200 km. Presumably, the YJ-82 guidance package (inertial autopilot + terminal active seeker) could be reused. Giving it a larger fuel tank wouldn't be that far-fetched in Iranian capabilities - China has the YJ-83 variant with claimed 180-250 km range, YJ-82A also has ~180 km claimed range.

the only one I can think out is some version of C-802, but that's stretching it for a missile that size. I was thinking maybe they actually got YJ-62 or maybe it's based on some Russian missile.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[Burunsuzoglu]

What do the Iranians have that can spot or provide good enough targeting data on a ship 200 miles away?

The Iranians have been doing a lot of upgrades to their pre 79 equipment?