Iran Launches First Locally Built Naval Destroyer

[Thiel]

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian state TV is reporting that the country has launched its first domestically built destroyer, calling it a major technological leap for its naval industries.

Iran has declared many such advances in its military industries and sciences to demonstrate self-sufficiency despite sanctions and attempts by the U.S. and its allies to isolate the country over its nuclear program.

Friday's broadcast says the guided-missile destroyer called Jamaran is equipped with anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles as well as torpedoes and naval cannons.

The report says the 308-foot destroyer weighs 1,500 tons and has a helipad and modern radar. The ship has a top speed of 30 knots and can carry 120 to 140 personnel.

Iran Launches First Locally Built Naval Destroyer - Iran | Map | News - FOXNews.com

Haven't seen anything about it here.

Calling this bucket of junk a destroyer is not even a political fiction, it's an outright lie. The Moudge II currently under construction in Iran is a corvette, and it displaces 20 tons more than the Jamaran.
It should also be noted that it's lighter than pre WWII destroyers.

While little is known about the class right now, a crude comparison* puts it roughly on line with the 30 years old Niels Juel class corvettes of the Royal Danish Navy.

*Done by me, so take it with a grain of salt.

 

[1805]

Surely this is just a reverse engineered Saam class. It's quite impressive that they have managed to do this and also the 76mm copy. I do wonder how much they can produce locally, they claim a submarine of 1000t? They also recently claimed to have built a area defence system more advance than S300. I can't believe this is the case so is it a complete lie or just to cover up the fact the Russians have sold them it and are not keen on this being confirmed.

 

[Thiel]

Surely this is just a reverse engineered Saam class. It's quite impressive that they have managed to do this and also the 76mm copy.

Well, it did take them 30 years to do so.

I do wonder how much they can produce locally, they claim a submarine of 1000t?

Very little is known about the Qaaem class submarine. If they ever get in the water, it's supposed to be capable of launching "advanced" torpedoes and missiles. But then again, my shaver is supposed to use "SONIC Technology" to give a smoother shave.

 

[1805]

Well, it did take them 30 years to do so.


Very little is known about the Qaaem class submarine. If they ever get in the water, it's supposed to be capable of launching "advanced" torpedoes and missiles. But then again, my shaver is supposed to use "SONIC Technology" to give a smoother shave.

True still impressive if they do get them in the water. I saw a pick of the 150t boat they have launched on here which was surposed to be streathy but look like a WW2 sub to me....

 

[Feanor]

Surely this is just a reverse engineered Saam class. It's quite impressive that they have managed to do this and also the 76mm copy. I do wonder how much they can produce locally, they claim a submarine of 1000t? They also recently claimed to have built a area defence system more advance than S300. I can't believe this is the case so is it a complete lie or just to cover up the fact the Russians have sold them it and are not keen on this being confirmed.

They don't claim that the SAM system is finished. They're claiming they're starting development of something along those lines.

 

[Thiel]

True still impressive if they do get them in the water. I saw a pick of the 150t boat they have launched on here which was surposed to be streathy but look like a WW2 sub to me....

Is this the one you're talking about?

I had never heard about it before know.

 

[AegisFC]

Is this the one you're talking about?

I had never heard about it before know.

He is probably talking about this.http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/data/4700/Iranian_Ghadeer_Mini-Sub.jpg

 

[Ananda]

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian state TV is reporting that the country has launched its first domestically built destroyer, calling it a major technological leap for its naval industries.

Iran has declared many such advances in its military industries and sciences to demonstrate self-sufficiency despite sanctions and attempts by the U.S. and its allies to isolate the country over its nuclear program.

Friday's broadcast says the guided-missile destroyer called Jamaran is equipped with anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles as well as torpedoes and naval cannons.

The report says the 308-foot destroyer weighs 1,500 tons and has a helipad and modern radar. The ship has a top speed of 30 knots and can carry 120 to 140 personnel.

Iran Launches First Locally Built Naval Destroyer - Iran | Map | News - FOXNews.com

Haven't seen anything about it here.

Calling this bucket of junk a destroyer is not even a political fiction, it's an outright lie. The Moudge II currently under construction in Iran is a corvette, and it displaces 20 tons more than the Jamaran.
It should also be noted that it's lighter than pre WWII destroyers.

Well you can not base everything based on what a Destroyer standard now in the west as 'bentchmark' for everyone else destroyers.
Now what used to be called light frigates now it's being call corvetes. A proper size destroyer based on western standard actually the size of what used tobe Light Cruisers.
The russian back whens still USSR standard for Frigates catually more be called as Corvetes in the west. Only end of USSR then the Russian begin developing Krivak which more inline with western standard for Frigates.
In Indonesia, we're building Light Frigates (based on what's seems Damen SIGMA corvetes or Ficantieri Commandante) and called them Destroyer Escort.

What's more important in here, Iran manage to reverse enginered UK's design by themselves even it took them several decades. This doing by them selves is something that no one in the middle east cappable on doing that, even ISRAEL.
They will not got anything that will match the sophistications of what Gulf states can get from the West or Russia, or what the Israel can get from US or developed together with US. However they (Iran) builds and reverse enginered most of that by their own internal resources.

For an attritions war scenario's this will mean a lot.

 

[Feanor]

Attrition naval warfare? Against whom? Pakistan? Iraq? :roll

 

[Ananda]

Attrition naval warfare? Against whom? Pakistan? Iraq? :roll

Against anyone else in the Gulf or Middle East for the matter...except US Navy
I Know it's a long shot...for US navy not involve in any naval engagement in the Gulf..but the possibilities still there..

 

[Warwiz]

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian state TV is reporting that the country has launched its first domestically built destroyer, calling it a major technological leap for its naval industries.
===================

One news article had the ship at 14,000 tons...I was like say what!?! Until I read it was really like 1,400 tons. And why call it a destroyer? Its more like a corvette.

 

[Thiel]

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian state TV is reporting that the country has launched its first domestically built destroyer, calling it a major technological leap for its naval industries.
===================

One news article had the ship at 14,000 tons...I was like say what!?! Until I read it was really like 1,400 tons. And why call it a destroyer? Its more like a corvette.

If one were feeling charitable, you could say it was because not everyone uses western units as measuring sticks. If one aren't you could point out Iran's enormous inferiority complex vis a vis the west, and specifically the US.

 

[icelord]

If one were feeling charitable, you could say it was because not everyone uses western units as measuring sticks. If one aren't you could point out Iran's enormous inferiority complex vis a vis the west, and specifically the US.

so if we build a 3,000 ton vessel throw a 4.5inch on the front, 76mm on the back, and call it a battleship then no one would complain? Its not so much "US" standard, but a more common label, say too NATO as they get the naming rights for a few things. even Russia goes by the same tonnage for Destroyers,cruisers Etc. Cant play special and claim it as a potato when it truely is a banana:dbanana

 

[Feanor]

Now what used to be called light frigates now it's being call corvetes. A proper size destroyer based on western standard actually the size of what used tobe Light Cruisers.
The russian back whens still USSR standard for Frigates catually more be called as Corvetes in the west. Only end of USSR then the Russian begin developing Krivak which more inline with western standard for Frigates.
In Indonesia, we're building Light Frigates (based on what's seems Damen SIGMA corvetes or Ficantieri Commandante) and called them Destroyer Escort.

so if we build a 3,000 ton vessel throw a 4.5inch on the front, 76mm on the back, and call it a battleship then no one would complain? Its not so much "US" standard, but a more common label, say too NATO as they get the naming rights for a few things. even Russia goes by the same tonnage for Destroyers,cruisers Etc. Cant play special and claim it as a potato when it truely is a banana:dbanana

We have a direct contradiction here gentlemen. I'm not knowledgeable on the subject so I was wondering if anyone could clear it up. Are there indeed largely accepted international standards for naming ship types?

 

[Thiel]

We have a direct contradiction here gentlemen. I'm not knowledgeable on the subject so I was wondering if anyone could clear it up. Are there indeed largely accepted international standards for naming ship types?

That's fairly simple. The Soviets used a different standard. I can't remeber the specifics, but it did mean that a soviet cruiser were about the same size as a western destroyer. That's where the so-called cruiser gap came from.

 

[Todjaeger]

We have a direct contradiction here gentlemen. I'm not knowledgeable on the subject so I was wondering if anyone could clear it up. Are there indeed largely accepted international standards for naming ship types?

Yes, there are some generally accepted standards, see below.

Per the NATO STANAG designator for ships:

• Cruiser (CC) 150+ m
• Destroyer (DD) 95 - 140 m
• Frigate (FF) 75 - 150 m
• Corvette (FS) 60 - 100 m

As one can see, the major difference tends to revolve around just how large the vessel is, with the size and displacement typically going from Cruiser>Destroyer>Frigate>Corvette. As one can see though, the Frigate category does have significant overlap of both the Corvette at the low end, and Destroyer at the high end. The general explanation for that is a Frigate tends to have less armament than a destroyer of similar size.

Otherwise the ships perform similar missions like ASW, air defence, ASuW, etc. The larger vessels tending to have greater range, as well as larger mission systems, bigger guns, more/longer-ranged missiles, etc.

-Cheers

 

[Thiel]

Yes, there are some generally accepted standards, see below.

Per the NATO STANAG designator for ships:

• Cruiser (CC) 150+ m
• Destroyer (DD) 95 - 140 m
• Frigate (FF) 75 - 150 m
• Corvette (FS) 60 - 100 m

As one can see, the major difference tends to revolve around just how large the vessel is, with the size and displacement typically going from Cruiser>Destroyer>Frigate>Corvette. As one can see though, the Frigate category does have significant overlap of both the Corvette at the low end, and Destroyer at the high end. The general explanation for that is a Frigate tends to have less armament than a destroyer of similar size.

Otherwise the ships perform similar missions like ASW, air defence, ASuW, etc. The larger vessels tending to have greater range, as well as larger mission systems, bigger guns, more/longer-ranged missiles, etc.

-Cheers

Doesn't the US use a displacement based system?
IIRC, it goes FAC<500 tons, Corvette 500-2000 tons, Frigate 2000-6000 tons, Destroyer 6000-9000 tons.
It explains why so many americans cry political fiction when they look a a lot of the more recent European frigates like the F125 at 7200 tons or the Ivar Huitfeldt at 6645 tons.