US deploys robot submarine armada against Iranian mines
The US is deploying a fleet of robotic submarine mine clearers to the Middle East to counter threats by Iran that it will close off the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of world oil supplies travel. The Sea Fox submersibles, manufactured by German firm Atlas Electronik, come equipped with a TV camera and sonar and are …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Yeah, "Anti-Semitism"
The Third Reich killed lots of Jews and therefore they are entitled to steal Arab land at gunpoint ? I guess that is "Zionist Algebra".
Re: Yeah, "Anti-Semitism"
Well, apart form the Mufti of Jersualem (Arafat's uncle, IIRC) being a personal friend of old Adolph, there was also the certain all-Muslim Bosnian SS division that the Mufti was very keen on. The Mufti was very happy with Hitler's efforts to exterminate the Jews. But I guess that wasn't on your herder-approved reading list, little sheep.
Re: @AC 14:22 Why not just eliminate the problem?
Looks like the UAE has taken up the idea - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18848986. Al-Fujayrah is just north of the UAE-Oman border and outside the Straits of Hormuz.
Re: Why not just eliminate the problem?
It's still be cheaper to police such a pipeline with 24/7 UAV, AWACS and foot-patrols than it would be to do the same to the Strait, though.
Re: Re: Why not just eliminate the problem?
Just as long as there aren't any Nigerians working nearbye....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6209845.stm
/kaaaaaBLOOOOIIE!!
Re: Why not just eliminate the problem?
Yeah, I heard they were into drilling for petrol.... from pipelines..... most unfortunate!
All in one go
Clear the straits of shipping, drop a couple of nuclear depth bombs and the shock wave will probably encourage all the mines to join in the general explosion. Added bonus of also disrupting the minelaying effort by sinking the minisubs. Further added bonus of effectively dredging the channel. Downside is the 'nuclear' part,
Re: All in one go
When the British sent a task-force to retake the Falklands in the 80's the HMS Sheffield was allegedly equipped with nuclear depth charges. Although they were hounded by a German made Argentine submarine throughout the operation, only conventional depth charges were used for fear of the precedent it would set. This despite the fact a nuclear charge would have almost certainly destroyed the submarine.
Are you seriously suggesting the US start using nuclear weapons against a country that they're currently castigating for supposedly trying to develop said weapons? Couple this with Iran already fearing for it's very existence in the shadow of Israel's undeclared nuclear armaments and you're setting up a situation where the Islamic Republic is backed into a corner with nowhere to go and they're only option is death or glory tactics akin to the Japanese in the 40's.
Re: All in one go
From a child hood spent studying the literature and cinematic output on this topic - it's obvious that any German submarine technology can be countered by an officer that looks like the captain out of TinTin and a couple of chirpy cockneys that unaccountably speak like an upper class dick van Dyke.
Re: Japan's peaceful Pan-Asia Imperial Racist ambitions circa 1940
"backed into a corner with nowhere to go and they're only option is death or glory tactics akin to the Japanese in the 40's."
These comparisons are ridiculous given what the Japanese were doing in China, Korea, and their plans for all of SE Asia, the Phillipines, etc. The Japanese were building a Japanese empire based on worship of the Emperor, an empire based on the racial superiority of the Japanese. Then the mean old USA came along and backed Japan into a corner, distracting Japan from raping China, Korea, etc. and forced the Japanese to go to war, oh wait, the Japanese were already at war, with fellow Asians nations and the British Empire.
Give this dead horse up. It has been beaten enough.
Re: Japan's peaceful Pan-Asia Imperial Racist ambitions circa 1940
You're concentrating on the wrong part of the 40's there. I was drawing a comparison to when the US was storming across the Pacific retaking captured land and building up to an invasion of the Japanese home islands. The Japanese were prepared to fight down to the last man rather than surrender and I suspect Iran will be much the same should it actually come to war.
@wayne 8
You kindly forget that it was US warships "opening" Japan to trade in the 19th century. By pointing their guns at the helpless Japanese of course.
The Japanese concluded that their strategy of isolating themselves from the shitty and uncivilized world of Anglo-American colonialism had failed. They reckoned that only a powerful navy and an aggressive colonial policy like the Anglo-American would ensure their freedom.
At Pearl Harbour, America was paid back that injustice - the sons died the death for the sins of their grand-grandfathers.
With Iran it is almost identical - America eliminated a democratic Iranian government because Anglosaxon economic interest of the was threatened. They set up the nasty dictator named Shah and backed his even more nasty secret police, who killed dissenters in scores. The Iranians finally got rid of the American Dictator and now you have an enemy who hates you from the depth of their soul.
Think about that when you marvel at the shit out of a Tom Clancy novel. All the shit you mete out will one day be slapped in your own face or the face of your son or grandson.
Some Yank Education Here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Japan#End_of_seclusion
simple.....
isn't this a case of the classic old joke about America and the USSR one spends millions making a pen work in space, the other uses a pencil...
perhaps im being a bit dim and I have no previous knowledge of this subject out side of history books so its quite likely I am, but is it not possible to employ something like Churchill's Funnies to take care of them, some kind of low keel plastic boat dragging something heavy, and magnetic behind it....
That's assuming they are using contact or magnetic mines I suppose but still, even if that got blown up it would cost a lot less than 100k
If You Are A Proper Engineer
..you will take a standard torpedo, a raspberry PI, some electrically actuated valves, some cheap hydrophones, a nitrogen bottle and an empty fire extinguisher. You will combine all of these into an "intelligent" mine which lies on the seabed and which will listen for ship's propeller noises.
Software will determine course and distance of the target ship and if it is close and slow enough the valves will open, the torpedo will float towards the surface and the motor will start. It will turn towards the target and start running fast. I can assure you, an RPI is all the "intelligence" you need.
I am not sure they have this capability, but I would not rule it out.
This is a good opportunity...
...for pilots and gunners to practice sinking terrorist Iranian boats. Night time practice should prove to be the best training. The only good terrorist is very dead.
Interesting To See Propaganda WORK
You know what good Mr Hitler told the boys he sent to the eastern front ? "Enemies of European civilization lurk behind the eastern border of Germany. It is your duty to save Europe from this Bolshevist threat by war."
Nowadays they use a bit different wording, "Bolshevism" has been replaced by "Terrorism" and "WMD". Maybe you look up who made the current Iranian government, who runs an Apartheid state suppressing Arabs and who is the 200-nuclear-cruise-missile-on-most-modern submarines Gorilla in this game.
Here are some links for you, boy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_class_submarine
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimona#Atomreaktor_bei_Dimona (use translate.google.com)
Re: Interesting To See Propaganda WORK
I call Godwin! You lose, even before you got started frothing.
".....who runs an Apartheid state suppressing Arabs...." Are you talking about the Lebanon, which will not allow Palestinian Arab refugees to register as Lebanese, or have proper jobs or benefits, having done so in breach of international refugee laws for over sixty years? Or about the Palestinian Authority, which has made it illegal for Jews to own land in the part of the West Bank the PA controls, illegal (on pain of death) for PA Arabs to sell land to Jews, and wants to evict all Jews from the West Bank? That's also called ethnic cleansing. Please do go on regurgitating the standard handwringer FUD because it is very easy to debunk.
Re: Interesting To See Propaganda WORK
Using hate terms like "Israeli Apartheid" pretty much torpedoes your own argument from the get-go.
Oh It is a "hate term", when it comes to Zionism
Could you please elaborate why treating black-skinned people like shit is Apartheid, while treating less dark-skinned people of Muslim or Christian faith like shit is what ? "defence" ? "regaining territory promised by our malicious $deity" ?
What they do clearly is a Flavour of Apartheid and it will tremendously hurt their own long-term security interests. Other Arabs are rightly furious about Arab people being stolen their land and being made right-less refugees on their own territory. Iran is rightfully supplying those Arabs with weapons to defend themselves from these egregious crimes.
If the current Israeli leadership were not a bunch of muppets they would strictly stick to their side of the wall they have erected. They trade some petty advantages for a long-term threat to the very existence of Israel.
Before you ask, I am German and I am not a Muslim and I hate the Bullcrap from the mainstream media and the mainstream church and their priests who can rationalize every shitty action powerful people can concoct.
Sigmar Gabriel Also Thinks it is Apartheid
See: http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/spd-chef-sorgt-ueber-facebook-fuer-aerger-gabriel-wirft-israel-apartheidspolitik-vor_aid_724483.html
and how the Zionist are trying to silence him. Mr Gabriel is the top SPD man, one of the two largest parties in Germany.
Re: Oh It is a "hate term", when it comes to Zionism
Young Crow is obviosuly too young to have done any form of history classes.
"....What they do clearly is a Flavour of Apartheid...." Total and immediate fail. In Israel, Israeli Arabs can vote, own property, and marry who they wish. In the PA-controlled West Bank, Jews cannot own property, cannot vote and cannot marry a Palestinian Arab without that Arab being killed by their own family or clan. Guess you just need to learn the meaning of the word "apratheid" before you start slinging it around. Total, complete fail.
@Lame Matt
Yes, Israeli Arabs do have some rights. But I was writing about the Arabs in the west bank and gaza. They don't have property rights, they can't trade with other nations, they cannot travel. So your petty argument is half-true - if you have an Israeli passport your basic rights might be respected, but if you are just a "conquered person", your rights are the same as those of a black man in South Africa circa 1980.
Jewish "Settlers" can kill you, take away your land and all they will get is a slap on the wrist from the Israeli "Army". Actually, a bunch of Terrorists, not an Army who respect the international laws of war.
Re: Oh It is a "hate term", when it comes to Zionism
‘The Germans will never forgive the Jews for Auschwitz.’
—‘Die Deutschen werden den Juden Auschwitz nie verzeihen.’ Henryk Broder quoting Zvi Rex in ‘Der Ewige Antisemit: Über Sinn und Funktion eines beständigen Gefühls’ (1986), p.130.
Re: @Lame Matt
"Yes, Israeli Arabs do have some rights...." Only some? They have the same as Israelli citizens of other religions.
"....But I was writing about the Arabs in the west bank and gaza. They don't have property rights...." Gaza has not been under Israelli occupation since 2005, so that point alone shows up the complete fallacy of your arguments. And even before then the Gazans could own and buy or sell their property as they liked. As for the West Bank, there is plenty of land owned by Arabs there and they can sell it as long as they don't sell it to Jews, unlike in Israel where an Israelli Arab can by land from any other Israelli. You fail again.
".....they can't trade with other nations....." And why not? Did you ever stop to ask why the Israellis started to build the barrier and control their borders? To stop terrorist attacks on Israelli civillians. Before the Intifada, the prime employer for West Bank Arabs and Gazans was actually companies in Israel, especially in the construction and agricultural industries. Fruit and flowers and other produce from the West Bank and Gaza was shipped out internationaly. After the barrier went up and stricter controls came in, the Israelli companies were scrabbling around for people to make up for the loss of Palestinian Arab employees, having to import cheap labour from the Far East, and the majority of the Palestinian Arabs were left with no employment. Which explains why more than 50% of the Gazans are completely reliant on EU and US handouts. Even more ironic was the fact that the Intifada made other Arab states less likely to employ "troublesome" Palestinian Arabs, particulalry in Jordan which had suffered two attempts by the PLO to take over the country. Palestinian Arab terrorism screwed the Palestinian Arabs, but then that was what countries like Iran wanted as unemployed, depressed people make for better suicide bombers.
"....but if you are just a "conquered person"...." ROFL! The Arabs had the chance to accept the UN partition plan in 1947 that would have given them the majority of the Palestine area now in the internationally-recognised country of Israel, on top of the three-quarters already set aside as Transjordan which was to be Arab-only. But the Arab leaders - especially their religious leaders - baulked at the idea of any Jews having any land in Palestine, despite there being a proven Jewish presence in Palestine for thousands of years and long before the rise of Islam. Fast forward sixty years and the Palestinian Arabs are suffering from that Arab greed and prejudice. Your frothing is even more amusing as the "refugees" in Arab countries like the Lebanon or Syrai have LESS rights and LESS opportunites for education and employment than those in the West Bank, and nowhere near the rights and opportunities afforded Israelli Arabs.
All you are displaying is your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.
Re: @Lame Matt
"....Jewish "Settlers" can kill you, take away your land and all they will get is a slap on the wrist from the Israeli "Army"...." The Israelli Army regularly evicts Jews from illegal settlements that are built without the proper authorisations in the West Bank or that are seena s confrontational with the Arabs (here are just a few examples; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7764984.stm, http://updatednews.ca/2012/06/26/west-bank-jewish-settlers-leave-ulpana-outpost/). Jewish settlers that are caught assaulting Arabs or plotting terrorisr acts are tried and convicted (such as this case; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3151930.stm). Palestinian Arabs that assault or kill Israelli civillians are hailed as heroes by the Palestinian Arabs (examples; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalal_Mughrabi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahya_Ayyash). Even those that murder the youngest of children are "heroes" to the Palestinian Arabs if they kill Jewish children (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar).
The evictions of Jewish settlers by the Israelli Army and Border Police can be violent, just like when the Israelli Army had to evict settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005 and from the Sinai in 1979-1982. Both of those latter events were when Israel WITHDREW from land seized during wars resulting from Arab aggression, and in both cases it was because Israel wanted peace. The Arab response was to kill the Egyptian premier that had negotiated peace with Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_El_Sadat). Given the Palestinian Arab response of more and more terror attacks, it is hardly likely the Israellis will give up any more land so trustingly.
Re: This is a good opportunity...
"The only good terrorist is very dead."
People who wear uniforms, drive flagged boats purchased under a host nation's defence budget, operating in national waters, aiming to destroy military vessels are by very definition NOT TERRORISTS.
If they are, then what the hell does that make the guy with his finger on a UAV's pickle switch, dropping a Hellfire into a village out of nowhere, hoping to get one guy, and considering any family members or bystanders as to be justifiable collateral damage?
Countermeasures?
Although the Sea Fox can operate down to 300 meters, it will be deployed at the depth of the Iranian mines. And since they are targeting shipping traffic, they will be shallow.
Since the Sea Fox is tethered to its destroyer mother ship with a fiber optic cable, all that one needs to do is to snag that cable with a hook towed from a speedboat. Possibly even an unmanned boat. It will either be cut or, worse yet, wrapped back around the destroyer.
I hope these things don't have a self destruct mode.
Re: Countermeasures?
The USN operating in the Gulf also advises all craft to maintain a set distance and to not interfere in their operations. Any speedboat getting close enough to interfere would be reduced to wreckage in very short order.
Me confused re optic cable
The article says the SeaFox might be dropped from a helicopter... how does that work with a tether?
Does the 'copter hover about in the vicinity til the sub finds a mine?
Easy solution
Country X says it's going to block the Strait of Hormuz with mines.
Sink all of country X's mine ships before they get the chance.
No need to waste more money on Sea Foxes.
Re: Easy solution
Can't do that... It's politically unpopular to attack terrorists until after they kill innocent people.
great name
If it had to dock in say, Newcastle, England, could it be renamed for the nonce? ;)
Stupid design
If it is going to be destroyed by the mine anyway, why does it need the shaped charge? Don't mines detonate when something hits them? All the sub needs to do is run into it. Hard to imagine something that just changes depth and moves slowly controlled by a fiber optic cable needs to cost anything like that. I wonder if there are hobbyist minisubs similar to the hobbyist RC planes, helicopters and boats? Bet those could ram the mine for much less than $100K!
Perhaps this won't work because the mines require a substantial amount of force (as with a heavy and/or fast ship) to detonate? If that's the case, then you should be able to have the minisub attach a shaped charge to the mine with a timed fuse and get away to a safe distance before it blows. Or once it verifies the mine, back away to a safe distance and hit it with a mini torpedo with a shaped charge in the head (OK, a minisub that shoots mini torpedos surely costs more than $100K, but unless those mini torpedos are very expensive you'd still come out ahead)
Unfortunately the DoD currently has essentially no cost constraints, as thousands of minisubs at $100K doesn't even add up to a billion dollars. This is a rounding error in their budget. The guys making the thing have some obvious incentives to design it stupidly like this so you need a new minisub for every mine cleared!
Re: Stupid design
".....Don't mines detonate when something hits them?...." You are thinking of the classic horned mine which relies on contact to explode and can be easily detected and sunk. Modern mines are often more intelligent, mostly sitting on the bottom so they are a lot harder to find, and use a detection system such as sonar or magnetic anomalies to trigger the main charge. Some are actually tethered torpedoes so they can attack a detected ship at range. The most sophisticated mines can cost millions of dollars and have a pressure hull so they can sit on the bottom at greater depths, so a shaped charge is required to punch a hole in them. Compared to those top-of-the-line mines, a $100,000 is not that much.
Re: Stupid design
Magnetic anomaly detection isn't that much better, just get something with a large magnetic field and run it across the surface, watch all the mines come up. Seems like it shouldn't be too hard to engineer if you know the exact parameters of the mines, and I'm betting the US knows exactly what Iran has.
Oh , Yeah , Rah Rah
"and I'm betting the US knows exactly what Iran has."
They also knew exactly about those "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in Iraq. Maybe the Iranian mines are developed by a competent group of Linux people who actually care about security, instead of running $ware from M$ and $iemens.
Re: Stupid design
> Don't mines detonate when something hits them?
That depends on the mine. Modern ones are somewhat more capable that the contact-spike things you see in war films.
Modern sea mines are typically looking for specific accoustic or magnetic signatures. This is why clearance diver kit is closed-circuit (to eliminate bubbling) and has all the chrome stripped off the brass bits (regs etc.)
CDBA is very, very expensive. But if you went in with a 5 grand unit like mine, it's pretty much guaranteed to blow up in your face.
There's bound to be a cheaper way to hunt mines and get them to explode than sending in $100K submarines. And it probably involves a Rasberry Pi...
Vic.
A cheaper way..
The Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) has been operational since 2008 with the USN, for those not familiar with this little gem it uses LIDAR to detect floating or shallow water mines down to 150 feet and dispatches them with 30mm super-cavitating rounds.
@Matt Bryant
Whilst I'm not entirely well versed in the peculiars of Middle East politics, your arguments have had several shortcomings.
1) You dismissed suggestions that the US was involved in any sort of proxy wars allied with Israel, as no US Army clad soldiers set foot on those lands, yet have repeatedly pointed the finger at Iran for supporting proxy wars via supposedly linked organisations.
Why can the US shirk responsibility when it (officially) funds & supplies Israeli military actions, yet Iran can't (allegedly) do the same?
I point out I'm not giving any justification for either, but you have been using contradictory arguments in what appears to be your uncritical support of US actions.
2) You've so far provided little justification for Israel's actions other than "because the other side did similar".
Two wrongs make a right?
Re: @Matt Bryant
Sir, unfortunately you have yet to realise that Mr Bryant is the sort of chap who could quite easily have a prolonged and heated argument in an empty room.
Re: @Matt Bryant
".....1) You dismissed suggestions that the US was involved in any sort of proxy wars allied with Israel, as no US Army clad soldiers set foot on those lands, yet have repeatedly pointed the finger at Iran for supporting proxy wars via supposedly linked organisations....." There is a major difference - the US supplies Israel but ISrael makes its own policies, and when Washington doesn't like them they withold funds. Teh Iranians not only fund groups like Hezbollah but actively direct them.
"....2) You've so far provided little justification for Israel's actions other than "because the other side did similar"....." Wrong. Your fruitloop firend posted that Iran is non-aggressive bit that Israel was, yet the historical evidence shows exactly the contrary.
Re: @Matt Bryant
Matt B. has not initiated a single argument—on this thread at least—but only has responded to posts by others. So your post, AC@13.46, is simply in the grand old liberal tradition of offering insult instead of argument. Do you wish dissenting opinions banned?
Anonymice’s post is simply the moral equivalence fallacy. Israel is the sole democracy in the Middle East—a Western-style social-democracy with the flaws common to modern social-democracies, and as imperfect as any creation by imperfect men. Where Israel has annual Gay Pride parades, Iran hangs homosexuals. While women enjoy complete equality before the law in Israel and have reached the highest political offices (e.g. Golda Meir), Iranian women have discrimination codified in law—veils are mandatory, young girls can be forced to marry adult men, etc.—women are even banned from attending sporting fixtures featuring male athletes.
A person’s attitude to Iran is a useful measure of their true opinions—someone can hardly claim to oppose religion while supporting a rigid theocracy; one cannot claim to champion women’s rights while supporting a state that denies them; one cannot claim to support Gay rights while supporting a state that executes homosexuals; one cannot claim to oppose capital punishment while supporting a state that mandates it for a wide range of offences, including homosexuality and female (but not male) adultery.
South Africa Was A Democracy, Too in the 1980s
And All White People Were Created Equal. Blacks were shit, as much as Arabs in the West Bank or Gaza are to the present day. You are full of excrement, NFI.
Re: South Africa Was A Democracy, Too in the 1980s
The old liberal canard of comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa… and abuse too. (Once upon a time there was a liberal who debated with courtesy, employing fact and logic… but enough of the fairy stories.)
1. As of 2011, the Israeli Knesset has 13 Arab members (one also a female, Hanin Zoabi)—how many non-whites were elected to the South African parliament prior to Apartheid ending?
2. So far, there have been two Arabs appointed to the Israeli Supreme Court (Abdel Rahman Zuabi and Salim Joubran)—how many non-whites were appointed to Apartheid S. Africa’s Supreme Court or any other court?
3. Arabs represent Israel abroad as diplomats, e.g. Ali Yahya, who has been Israeli ambassador to Finland and Greece or Ishmael Khaldi, the Israeli consul in San Francisco (2006–9)—how many non-white diplomats represented South Africa in their embassies during Apartheid?
4. Apartheid S. Africa prohibited interracial sexual and martial relations—no such restrictions exist under Israeli law.
5. Arabs have attained the highest ranks in the Israeli Defence Forces, such as Major-Generals Hussain Fares and Yosef Mishlav—how many non-whites were even commissioned as officers in the Apartheid-era S.A.D.F.?
6. Arabs similarly suffer no restriction in the Israeli police, and Jamal Hakroush was promoted to the rank of Deputy Inspector-General in 2011—how many non-whites attained such high rank in the Apartheid-era S.A.P.?
Incidentally, Gaza is no longer Israel’s responsibility having left in 2005; if Arabs there are ‘s**t’ as you so repellently phrase it, then take it up with the Palestinian Authority and their Hamas representatives as they are the ones in charge.
Israel is far from perfect, a typical Western social-democracy with all the flaws that implies (they even abolished capital punishment—a stark contrast to Iran who Amnesty reported executing at least 600 people between January and November 2011); but it is far better than the medieval theocracies that liberals have embraced.
Re: @NFI
One doesn't "initiate an argument" quite in the way you describe on a comments thread, except possibly in a case of indisputable trolling for a reaction. Some commenters have simply made statements as to their opinions or beliefs.
Others (such as Matt Bryant) then CHOOSE to argue WITH them. Without a retort / response, there is no argument.
Re: @NFI
So you are suggesting, AC@11.33, that your opinions should never, ever suffer counter? That you have some Gaia-given right to proclaim your views while those who disagree must remain silent?
If you want an echo-chamber, start your own website.
Re: @NFI
No, I was not suggesting anything of the sort. My message was quite concise and clear, I have no idea how you managed to twist it into something completely unrelated. It seems you are somewhat confused, I'm not sure whether you erroneously associate some of the previous comments with my authorship?
You are obviously incapable of understanding simple assertions or engaging in any constructive communication, so I shall attempt no further to make you familiar with the intended point.
Re: @NFI
AC@11.33&15.00. You wrote clearly above: ‘Some commenters have simply made statements as to their opinions or beliefs. … Without a retort / response, there is no argument.’ Well obviously if no-one disagrees then ‘there is no argument’; and apparently your problem is that people dare to express disagreement.
If someone expresses an opinion in a ‘public’ forum, then others have every right to offer rebuttal (notwithstanding rules set by our host, The Register®).
This topic is closed for new posts.
