Military Review

Iranian air force against American AUG. What are the chances?

216
Recent ones news: the American shock group still goes to the coast of Iran. The nuclear aircraft carrier "Abraham Lincoln", escort ships ... Unfortunately, there are no data on them, although the composition of the AUG could perfectly clarify the real goals of US politicians. If we are talking about the next projection of force, then we should expect a couple of destroyers "Arly Burk", perhaps, instead of one of them will be the missile cruiser "Ticonderoga." For a long time, the United States does not take full-fledged AUG into the sea, at least with 5-6 escort ships, not to mention the “good old days” when AUG could count 16-17 pennants. But if the Americans still admit the possibility of real military action, then the escort "Abraham Lincoln" must be at least 5 class ships "destroyer" and above.


Of course, such news could not but arouse very lively discussions on the VO and, in the light of the opinions expressed, it would be interesting to compare the potential of the Iranian Air Force with the air group of a single American aircraft carrier. Can Abraham Lincoln seriously threaten Iran, or is it just a paper tiger?


"Abraham Lincoln" in person


Iranian Air Force: a short and sad story


Until 1979, the Iranians were fine with the Air Force - the Americans "took patronage" over them, providing the air forces of this country with a very perfect materiel, including heavy Tomcat F-14A fighters (actually interceptors that can be considered the American counterpart of our MiGs -25 and MiG-31), multipurpose F-4D / E "Phantoms" and light F-5E / F "Tiger". Thus, the Iranian Air Force was armed with a modern and efficient line of tactical aircraft, and in addition, the United States also supplied them with basic patrol aircraft aviation P-3F Orion, military transport aircraft S-130N Hercules, transport and refueling aircraft based on the Boeing 707 and 747. In addition, obviously, the United States assisted in the training of pilots of this aircraft.

However, then the Islamic revolution came, and everything flew to Tartar. The Americans fully favored the shah of Iran, but still did not dare to speak out on his defense weaponsbecause the latter too clearly violated human rights - in fact, in those years, the opposition to the Shah did not have any such rights at all. But, naturally, it would never occur to anyone in the United States to “make friends” with the Islamist revolutionaries, so Iran immediately fell under American sanctions.

The result is the following. Iran still possessed a significant fleet of American aircraft, but, not having some developed aviation industry, could not, of course, provide this fleet with the necessary spare parts and qualified repairs. He also could not replenish stocks of anti-aircraft missiles, buying them from the United States. And besides, as we know, the pilots of the Air Force are the elite of the armed forces, and many of them have been betrayed by the shah. Others occupied high posts with him - and this, alas, was enough for the victorious revolutionaries to consider the Air Force as "politically unreliable" and to arrange a "great purge", thereby depriving themselves of a significant number of well-trained pilots. And, alas, there was nowhere to take new ones.

Thus, by the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war, which lasted from 1980 to 1988 and which became the only major conflict in which the Iranian pilots had participated, the Air Force of the victorious Islamic revolution was not met with the best condition. They still had several hundred combat aircraft at their disposal, but there was nowhere and nothing to repair and maintain them, and there were not enough pilots.



The result is the following. During the fighting, the Iranian Air Force demonstrated a marked superiority over the Iraqi rival: Iranians were better at air operations, and losses in air battles were significantly lower than Iraqi ones. But with all of this, the Iranians did not manage to smash the Iraqi air forces and ensure air supremacy, and then non-combat losses quickly began to show: for example, by the beginning of 1983, the share of combat-ready aircraft hardly exceeded 25% of their fleet. The rest required repair, or were “cannibalized” for parts.

Thus, by the end of 1988, the Iranian Air Force was literally “at the broken trough” - no aircraft, no pilot training systems, no spare parts, no aircraft equipment - nothing. It is clear that this situation was unacceptable.

In 1990, Iran purchased the 12 Su-24МК, 18 MiG-29 and 6 MiG-29UB from the USSR, and in addition, some F-7М were purchased in China, representing a Chinese clone of the MiG-21. But then the Iranians literally received a royal gift: during the “Storm in the Desert” a significant part of the Iraqi Air Force, in order to avoid the destruction of multinational forces by aircraft, flew to the airfields of Iran.

The Iranians did not return these planes, preferring to consider them as an unexpected, but therefore no less pleasant, reparation for the Iran-Iraq war. True, the question remains whether Iran has trained pilots for these aircraft.



The current state of the Iranian Air Force


It is rather difficult to judge about it, because, first, the numbers of the aircraft available to the Air Force are somewhat different, and secondly, it is unclear which of them can take off and fight, and which exist only "for show" and today day are not capable. According to Col. A. Rebrov, the share of Iran’s combat-ready aircraft is:

1. F-14A "Tomcat" - 40%.

2. 4D / E Phantom - 50%.

3. F-5E / F Tiger - 60%.

The colonel does not say this directly, but on the basis of other figures given by him, it is most likely that Soviet and Chinese aircraft are in the best technical condition and have warheads of the order of 80% of the total, which, generally speaking, is a good indicator for any country.

Based on the foregoing, we will try to determine the number of combat-ready aircraft of the Iranian Air Force

fighter aircraft


F-14A "Tomcat" - 24 units In total, there are, according to various data, from 55 to 65 machines, the author took to calculate the average - 60 machines.

MiG-29 / U / UB - 29 units Their total number is 36, but many questions arise here. The fact is that of these, Iran bought only 24 machines from the USSR, and 12 “flew” to it from Iraq - today all these aircraft either turned 30 years old, or they exceeded this age. As it is known, there are practically no MiG-29 early series in Russia today, they all have exhausted their resources, and, to tell the truth, it is unlikely that they were served better in Iran. In addition, the MiG-29, generally speaking, was a very demanding machine for aircraft, it needed up to 80 man-hours of inter-flight service at 1 flight time (usually this figure ranges from 30 to 50 man-hours). In general, the author of this article has an assumption that either the MiG-29 is now completely incapacitated, or they still have a certain amount of resource, but there are no trained pilots. The logic is very simple - if the Iranians flew on them, then they had to exhaust the resource, and if they didn’t fly, then they do not have trained pilots for these aircraft.

Dassault Mirage F1 - 5 units counted although they are most likely incompetent. Iran has never bought these planes, and the 10 machines it contains are a “gift” of Iraq. It is unlikely that Iran, having neither pilots, nor spare parts, and nothing at all for the Mirage, and even under the conditions of sanctions, was able to somehow maintain them in a combat-ready state.

HESA Azarakhsh and HESA Saeqeh - 35 units (30 and 5 units, respectively). This is the pride of the Iranian aviation industry, which has mastered the production of analogue fighter F-5E / F "Tiger".



Iranians, of course, argue that their counterpart is improved in comparison with the prototype. But since the Iranian aviation industry is still taking only the first steps, with the same success we can assume that their planes are not an improved, but a degraded version of a car that is not bad for its time.

F-7M - 32 units This is a Chinese copy of the MiG-21, which Iran currently has 39 units, including combat training. Assuming that 80% of this amount in the ranks, we get the maximum 32 units.

And what about weapons? Well, there is one good news here - the Iranians have acquired from us some quite decent URVV P-73 short range. At one time, at the end of the last century, she deservedly could claim to be the best short-range aviarakety. Today, of course, this is far from being the most modern, but still formidable weapon in an air battle, capable of quite effectively shooting down any air targets.

No more good news.

Iran has managed to set up production of Fattar - short-range URVV from an infra-red hsn, but what kind of missiles they are and what they can - the author, alas, is unknown. It is possible, of course, that this is a copy of the P-73, or a product “based on”, but this is fortune telling on the coffee grounds, and in any case, these missiles will not be better than the P-73. In addition, it is possible that Iran still has some number of old Sidewind.

Medium-range missiles from the Iranians also exist, but which ones? This may be some surviving Sparrow and Soviet P-27 missiles. Alas, both have long since become obsolete, and their performance characteristics are thoroughly known to the Americans, so preparing their electronic means of countering the guidance of such missiles is not difficult for them. However, the Iranians have one more, oddly enough - the medium-range air combat missile that has no analogues in the world.

The fact is that, as is known, the Americans, complete with “Tomcats”, delivered to Iran a certain amount (according to some sources - 280) of long-range UVRV “Phoenix”. Apparently, the stocks of these missiles have long been exhausted, but the Iranians liked the idea. Therefore, they took the Hawk ground-based anti-aircraft missile system and ... adapted it for firing with the F-14A, thereby obtaining a very original air attack system capable of hitting air targets at a distance of 42 km. Of course, one can only admire the ingenuity of the Iranian military industry, and, probably, such weapons may well be effective against aviation by any of the Arab countries, but still the Hawk was adopted in 1960 and today the complex as a whole , and its rockets in particular, are unconditionally outdated.

Thus, we see that formally Iranian fighters are very, very numerous: 173 machines, of which, probably, 125 are “on the wing”. But of them, perhaps, only F-14A "Tomkat", in which the Iranians were taught to fly by the Americans, and which they successfully used in combat, have real combat significance. And also domestic MiG-29А, if the latter remained “on the wing” and if Iran has pilots prepared to fight for them.



Such airplanes, with the most daring assumptions, have Iranians in the ranks of no more than 55-60, while they are equipped with outdated avionics and armament (with the exception of Р-73) and, of course, in all articles lose to deck "Hornet" and "Superhornets" " Abraham Lincoln.

bombers


Su-24MK - 24 units in ranks, 30 units. in stock. That is, there is a full-fledged air regiment of these not the easiest to pilot, but still very dangerous planes.

F-4D / E Phantom - 32 units in ranks, 64 units. in stock.

F-5E / F "Tiger" - 48 in the ranks, 60 in stock.

Su-25 - 8 units In the ranks, 10 in stock.

Here, of course, the question may arise - why are the “Phantoms” and “Tigers” assigned not to fighters, but to bomber? It must be said that both of them are fully capable of using air-to-air air-launched air defense missiles, while the “Phantoms” “trained” to work with P-27 and P-73, and “Tigers” - only with P-73. Moreover, the “Phantomov” radar has been improved - the ability to see low-flying targets has been improved.

However, the Iranians themselves attributed them to the bomber aircraft. Perhaps the explanation lies in the fact that both the Phantoms and the Tigers are already very old cars made before 1979. That is, today they serve about 40 for years or more and had not the best maintenance. Therefore, it is possible that the aircraft of these types, although they can take to the air and drop the bomb on the enemy, are still unable to conduct a maneuverable air battle with all its congestion.

We will not consider the full range of weapons of Iranian bombers, we only note that Iran was able to organize the production of guided bombs with television and laser seeker and air-to-surface missiles with a range of up to 30 km. But the greatest danger to warships are the anti-ship missiles C-801 and C-802, created in China.


C-802 in the foreground


C-802 is a subsonic 715 kg rocket equipped with an active radar seeker and a warhead weighing 165 kg. The firing range is 120 km, while the RCC is flying at an altitude of 20-30 m on the march, and 5-7 m is flying at the final part of the trajectory. C-802 "professes" the principle of "fired and forgotten", but correction is possible in flight from a ship or carrier aircraft. Chinese missiles of this type are also equipped with the GLONASS / GPS satellite navigation subsystem, but whether it is on the Iranian anti-ship missiles is unknown. The Chinese themselves assess the capabilities of the GOS C-802 very highly, believing that the AGNS of these missiles provides 75% the likelihood of a target being captured even in the conditions of electronic countermeasures. So it is, or not, is unknown, but, apparently, the GOS of this rocket is still more perfect than that of the first-generation anti-ship missiles. As for the C-801, the predecessor of the C-802, they are structurally similar in many respects, and the main difference lies in the engine: the C-801 is not a turbojet, but a less efficient solid-fuel engine that provides a range of more than 60 km.

PKR C-802 was established in China in 1989, currently Iran has mastered the production of its counterpart under the name "Nur". Thus, it can be assumed that the missiles of this type of Iranian air force are not lacking. In this case, the ability to use such missiles have both Su-24MK and F-4D / E "Phantom".



In addition to the C-802, X-58 anti-radar missiles can be dangerous for warships - having a mass of 640 kg and a mass of warhead 150 kg. It must be said that the X-58, being put into service in the already distant 1978, was subjected to numerous upgrades and therefore remains relevant to this very day, being one of the regular ammunition of the promising Su-57. Unfortunately, it is not known what kind of modification went to the Iranian Air Force, but nevertheless we note that the very first X-58 were able to induce radar, constantly changing operating frequencies.

Other aviation of Iran


As you know, today intelligence and electronic warfare play a huge role, but with this, alas, Iran’s not just bad, but just a black hole. Theoretically, the Iranian Air Force has an ARLO 2 aircraft, but, apparently, only one of them is working properly, and that one is limited in use. Iran does not have an EW aircraft, and, apparently, there are no modern EW suspension containers either. Of the rest of the fleet, only the Orion five patrol aircraft and six Phantoms converted into reconnaissance aircraft are suitable for reconnaissance.

Of course, the list of Iranian Air Force aviation is not limited to this. At the disposal of the Iranian military there is still a large number of light training transport and other non-combat aircraft and helicopters, and in addition, drones for various purposes, including a large number of heavy shock UAVs "Carrar", capable of carrying up to a ton of payload.

Iranian air force against American AUG. What are the chances?


Avraham Lincoln Air Group


Unfortunately, it is not known exactly how many combat aircraft are currently on board this American aircraft carrier. It is possible that it carries a standard "reduced" wing in the 48 F / A-18E / F Super Hornet, or earlier F / A-18C Hornet, and also the EW EA airplanes supporting 4-5 -18G “Growler” and the same number of DRLO E-2C “Hokai” aircraft, not counting helicopters and so on. But, if the Pentagon admits the possibility of military actions, then the number of combat Hornets can easily be reduced to 55-60 units.

conclusions


It is known that in the USSR for the destruction of AUG it was planned to use the 2 regiment of missile-carrying aircraft armed with Tu-22 aircraft under the cover of one, but better, two fighter aviation regiments and support aircraft.

If we consider the capabilities of the Iranian Air Force, we will see that they look quite impressive. Theoretically, Iran can use for the attack on AUG not 4, and no less than 6 units equivalent to domestic air regiments - 3 fighter on Tomcats, MiG-29 and Iranian Tiger clones and 3 bomber on Su-24MK, and Fantami. "Tiger". The main danger for the American air group will be 55-60 of Su-24MK and Phantom airplanes, which the Iranians will be able to equip C-802 and Nur anti-radar missiles, as well as X-58 anti-radar weapons, in a shock version.

Without a doubt, neither the "Tomkaty" nor the first series MiG-29 are unable today to withstand the deck "Hornet" in the air, operating with the support of DRLO and EW aircraft. On the "Tiger" and their Iranian "clones" and say nothing. But, considering the option of a possible confrontation, we note that this is not required of them.

In fact, the task of the Iranian Air Force will be to organize an airstrike with the entire mass of its capable aircraft, while the Su-24MK and Phantoms will be “hidden” in the mass of the Tigers, MiGs and Tomcats. Let's not forget that correctly identifying these planes by type will be rather difficult for American radars. They, of course, will find the Iranian aircraft, and identify them as hostile targets, but understand where the MiG is and where Su will not be easy. In other words, an American unit may find itself in a situation where a multitude of aircraft are attacking it from several directions, the number of which, again in theory, can reach 200 - the American air defense system will simply “choke” with so many targets.

In order to have at least minimal chances to withstand such a strike, the Americans will have to bring into battle a maximum of combat aircraft, preferably everything that is. But this will be possible only if the Abraham Lincoln completely abandons the shock operations and concentrates its air group to repel air attacks. But in this case, the AUG, obviously, will not be able to strike at the territory of Iran except as with Tomahawk cruise missiles, whose ammunition on escort ships is very limited. And even if the Americans succeed, and they will be able to meet the Iranian Air Force with all their fighters, each “super-cusp” will have Iranian planes on the 3-4.

Thus, the numerical composition and the performance characteristics of airplanes and their armaments by the Iranian Air Force in principle make it possible to crush a single US AUG. To do this, they should:

1. Spread out the strength of their aircraft. This is a classic of the air war - in the run-up to an enemy strike, remove aircraft from their permanent bases on civilian and military airfields prepared for this.

2. If possible, earlier detect AUG. This task is not easy, but not as difficult as it may seem at first glance, because to strike a strike, the US aircraft carrier must move closer to the coast of Iran from the Arabian Sea, or even stick in the narrowness of the Oman or Persian Gulf. These areas are distinguished by very dense shipping, and having deployed a sufficient number of transports or tankers there, as well as having established patrols by non-military aircraft, it is quite possible to detect AUG. The problem of the Americans will be that in the areas in which they are to operate, there is a very dense "traffic" of civilian ships and aircraft, so it will be extremely difficult to distinguish between them Iranian spies.

3. Ideally, wait for the attack of the US carrier-based aviation on any Iranian object.

4. And at that moment, when significant forces of the Avraham Lincoln wing were diverted to conduct a strike operation, raise the bulk of their aircraft and invest all their strength in a single blow to the US AUG.

In this case, the tasks of Iranian fighters of all types will, in fact, clarify the location of the AUG and divert to the "attention" of American carrier aircraft. The Iranian planes will be able to accomplish this task, albeit at the cost of enormous losses. And then - a strike by anti-ship and anti-radar missiles from Su-24 and Phantoms, it is quite possible to ensure the density of missiles under 100-120, which is quite enough to disable the aircraft carrier. In addition, if it is technically possible, it would be nice to let the Carrars drones to the side of the AUG (precisely to the side) - naturally, they will not cause any harm to the Americans, but will add an additional amount of “targets”, overloading the United States air defense.

So, the first conclusion: technically, the Iranian Air Force has the capacity to destroy the AUG, at least at the cost of extremely heavy losses of its own aircraft.

But can they do this in practice? Here the author of this article has big doubts. The fact is that the action described above on paper looks very simple, but in reality is a very complicated Air Force operation that cannot be carried out without the extremely serious prior training and the highest professionalism of the pilots. Where did they come from the Iranian Air Force?

Yes, they showed good results in the war against Iraq, but not nearly as high as they were in the wars against the Arab countries of the Israeli Air Force. It can be assumed that at that time, the Iranian air force in terms of combat training was somewhere in the middle between the air forces of other Arab countries and Israel, which means they were inferior to the US air forces. But more than 35 years have passed since then, those pilots who fought with the Iraqis are mostly retired. And could the Iranians, under the conditions of the sanctions, prepare them a decent shift? Does Iran have enough pilots for all available aircraft?

According to some data, today the Iranians are conducting quite intensive training with forces up to the regiment of attack aircraft, including with low-altitude flights and real launches of anti-ship missiles. But the maneuvers, under which a concentrated strike by masses of fighters and bombers on a naval target would be worked out, were not fixed. In other words, if all of a sudden, by some miracle, Iranian pilots gained the skill of warriors of naval-carrying naval aviation of the USSR times, then the author of this article would not doubt their success. But just where to get a wizard who would do such a miracle?

And from this follows a second conclusion: the Iranians, of course, have the technical ability to defeat a single American AUG, but it is far from a fact that the professionalism of the Iranian pilots and their commanders will allow it. It is quite possible that all that the Iranian air force suffices in the event of a conflict with the United States are sporadic attacks on relatively small groups of aircraft with which the Abraham Lincoln wing can easily cope.

Nevertheless, the author believes that the attempt to "punish" Iran with the forces of a single aircraft carrier borders on insanity. In order to ensure approximate parity in the air with the Iranian Air Force, Americans will need at least two aircraft carriers, three aircraft carriers will provide an advantage, and Americans will gain overwhelming superiority by concentrating four ships of this class for the operation.
Author:
216 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. SETSET
    SETSET 14 May 2019 18: 10 New
    -2
    Author! It is incorrect to write about analogues of the F-14A, it was never an analogue of the Mig-25 and Mig-31 and close, he could not get closer to the indicated aircraft at the maximum speed, not on the ceiling.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 18: 21 New
      18
      Quote: SETSET
      It is incorrect to write about the F-14A analogues, it has never been an analogue of the Mig-25 and Mig-31 and close.

      Was, as Tomkoshk and our MiG-25 and MiG-31 were intended to solve similar problems by similar methods.
      1. GKS 2111
        GKS 2111 14 May 2019 18: 26 New
        +2
        "The Americans will need at least two aircraft carriers, three aircraft carriers will provide an advantage, and the Americans will get overwhelming superiority by concentrating four ships of this class for the operation."
        So you yourself have answered your own question .. hi
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2019 18: 29 New
          10
          Quote: GKS 2111
          So you yourself have answered your own question ..

          I do not understand :)))) If you mean the question in the title of the article, I wrote a whole article-answer to it :)))
          1. Romario_Argo
            Romario_Argo 14 May 2019 19: 26 New
            +1
            Andrey. it is not appropriate to consider the odds given the Iranian air force
            rather, you need to consider the situation as: "sews and a sword"
            since Iran’s air defense has 5 divisions C-300PMU-2
            1. knn54
              knn54 14 May 2019 19: 36 New
              +5
              Roman, first (as with Syria) the Tomahawks will fly, will the S-300 cope with them? Iran does not have a MODERN echeloned missile defense /
              Air Defense. As were the way (to the S-300) TOR.
          2. asv363
            asv363 14 May 2019 19: 38 New
            +2
            In addition to the article:

            Latest News: The US strike group is nevertheless heading for the Iranian coast. The nuclear carrier “Abraham Lincoln”, security ships ... Unfortunately, there are no data on them, although the composition of the AOG could perfectly clarify the real goals of US politicians. If we are talking about another projection of force, then we should expect a couple of destroyers "Arly Burke", perhaps instead of one of them will be a missile cruiser "Ticonderoga".

            Aircraft carrier excursion - 3 destroyers and 1 missile cruiser.
          3. Nyrobsky
            Nyrobsky 14 May 2019 21: 35 New
            -1
            Nevertheless, the author believes that the attempt to "punish" Iran with the forces of a single aircraft carrier borders on insanity. In order to ensure approximate parity in the air with the Iranian Air Force, Americans will need at least two aircraft carriers, three aircraft carriers will provide an advantage, and Americans will gain overwhelming superiority by concentrating four ships of this class for the operation.
            From the point of view of solving the problem by involving only the Iranian air force, maybe the picture is consistent. But the fact is that Iran has made significant progress in the field of rocket science and, using the Yemen test site on behalf of the Hussites, tested its samples on the vessels of the Saudis and emirates. In addition, Iran has a number of submarines. If we take these factors together, it becomes clear Iran’s expression regarding the fact that "the US AOG is considered by Iran as a target, but not as a frightening factor"

          4. Simfy
            Simfy 15 May 2019 12: 16 New
            11
            Why doesn’t anyone take into account ground based US aviation ??? Strikes can be made from the territory of Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. .. Israel will definitely not stand aside, there will be more allies in the region ... that will be a 5-fold superiority. Iran has zero chance. Plus, there will definitely be a “fifth column” ...
            1. Mikhail Matyugin
              Mikhail Matyugin 27 May 2019 14: 28 New
              0
              Quote: Simfy
              Why no one takes into account the ground-based US aircraft ??? Strikes can be carried out from the territory of Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and so on. Definitely, Israel will not be left behind, there will also be allies in the region.

              this is exactly what was missed in the article! Although Israel, in my opinion, is unlikely to participate in a coalition, where the UAE will fight with Saudi Arabia, rather, it will "solve the problem" with Iranian units in Syria.
        2. smart ass
          smart ass 14 May 2019 19: 35 New
          +4
          Aviks need at least 2 if there is 1 then nothing. Will be
        3. PROXOR
          PROXOR 16 May 2019 12: 31 New
          +1
          I can’t understand one thing. Why on earth do mattresses risk AUG when Iran has a “loyal” Iraq at hand? As well as no less loyal SA and UAE.
      2. NEXUS
        NEXUS 14 May 2019 19: 46 New
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        our MiG-25 and MiG-31 were designed to solve similar problems with similar methods.

        The namesake, painted everything in color, but only missed one moment ... if the Iranian Air Force launched a full-scale attack on the AUG, what is the likelihood that they will not arrive in response, say a couple of missiles with small nuclear warheads? In general, these arguments about what Iran can and what can not against a nuclear power that sits overseas are very strange. And if you recall that mattresses are now in full swing the strategy of local wars with the use of small nuclear charges, then in general the oil painting.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 14 May 2019 19: 58 New
          12
          Quote: NEXUS
          if Iranian Air Force launch a full-scale attack on AUG

          And why should they attack the AUG? Is it that dare to do well done ...
          In terms of efficiency, the best option is to block the Strait of Hormuz for tankers. The check and mat. And due to geography, no AUGs will protect against this.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            14 May 2019 21: 19 New
            +5
            Quote: Spade
            In terms of efficiency, the best option is to block the Strait of Hormuz for tankers. Checkmate

            Iran Because after this, the United States will only remain methodically grinding the forces by which such a blockade is carried out - that's all.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 14 May 2019 21: 27 New
              +3
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Iran.

              He will be on the drum that the oil on 400 will cost. Rather, on the contrary, he will be happy.
              Every sixth barrel consumed in the world goes through this strait ...

              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              methodically grind forces

              One aviation cannot do it
              And it’s more expensive to drag ships to the Gulf. You can really run into, because there is still experience ...
              And do not forget that the clock is ticking.
              1. NEOZ
                NEOZ 15 May 2019 17: 37 New
                +1
                Quote: Spade
                that oil will cost 400.

                and if not? there will be overlap or not the oil price will not be affected.
                Quote: Spade
                Every sixth barrel consumed in the world passes through this strait ...

                those. sixteen% !!!! The United States will kindly ask the rest of the producers to increase production to the level of losses and / or will print their oil and / or will drive shale oil at a loss (dumping - crowding out - monopoly).
                ps
                Did you go to the BTR-80?
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 15 May 2019 17: 52 New
                  0
                  Quote: NEOZ
                  Did you go to the BTR-80?

                  Never. Exclusively on the armor.
              2. Mikhail Matyugin
                Mikhail Matyugin 28 May 2019 11: 46 New
                0
                Quote: Spade
                He will be on the drum that the oil on 400 will cost. Rather, on the contrary, he will be happy.
                Every sixth barrel consumed in the world passes through this strait.

                More, much more - according to various estimates from 1 \ 5 to 1 \ 3 oil and gas through this strait (oil export in the Caribbean due to the sanctions against Venezuela is very much reduced). The UAE and Saudi Arabia, although they gradually build external oil and gas pipelines bypassing Ormuzd, but so far there are few of them, and the war in Yemen does not allow routing to end (and this is the reason for Iran’s help to the Hussites).

                And oddly enough, but it turns out that Russia is interested in stirring up this local war between the United States and Iran, as it were, not more than the United States and Iran themselves, since our budget is tied to the rate of oil and gas deals, and the hotter in the Middle East, the higher the rate of oil and the increase in the value of our exports.
            2. doktorkurgan
              doktorkurgan 15 May 2019 07: 48 New
              +5
              Mining (including the use of boats), the use of martyrs on boats is the same, land complexes of anti-ship missiles (they regularly mask them for civilian trailers). Grinding, of course, is possible - but it will take a lot of effort and money, and not the fact that it will be possible to completely solve this problem.
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2019 20: 29 New
          +7
          Quote: NEXUS
          but only missed one moment ... if the Iranian Air Force launches a full-scale attack on the AUG, what is the likelihood that they will not be answered in response to say a couple of CDs with a small YABZ?

          High :))) Recall the Falklands :))) The United States can break Iran if they really need it, but they don’t need to use nuclear weapons from the word "absolutely" - very politically in relation to the whole world
        3. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 14 May 2019 23: 18 New
          +6
          Quote: NEXUS
          The namesake, colorfully painted everything, but only missed one moment ..

          Andrew, hello! hi
          I agree with you, but in a somewhat different aspect. AVU is in the security of 2-s EM and 1 RKR but the SSGs are not excluded:
          In addition to the atomic aircraft carrier, the group includes deck-wing aircraft wing, missile cruiser Leyte Gulf (Leite Gulf), destroyers Bainbridge (Bainbridge), Mason (Mason) and Nitze (Nitz). In addition, it may include one or two strike nuclear submarines, equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles ("Tomahawk").

          But a colleague did not say anything about the Iranian submarine forces. And without their participation, AVU cannot be stopped. Moreover, it will be guarded by the PLA ... By the way, the Persians could with their help secretly put the MZM on the AVU movement path ...
      3. boathouse
        boathouse 14 May 2019 20: 37 New
        -1
        Absolutely right! It’s worth taking a closer look at the “main caliber” of the MiG-31, something like these missiles are suspiciously similar to the American “Phoenix”. But there is a stubborn rumor that nobody really confirms, but stubbornly does not refute, that one F-14 along with missiles was stolen in the USSR in the late 70s.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2019 21: 21 New
          +2
          Quote: varadero
          It is still worth a closer look at the "main caliber" of the MiG-31, something these missiles are suspiciously similar to the American "Phoenix"

          It is doubtful they even have different principles of guidance.
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. boathouse
            boathouse 14 May 2019 23: 24 New
            0
            No, I meant P-33 early years of release.
            1. SETSET
              SETSET 14 May 2019 23: 31 New
              +1
              Yes, R-33, I was wrong! No, the USSR created the Mig-31 completely by itself, but it’s a myth about the F-14A.
              1. boathouse
                boathouse 14 May 2019 23: 41 New
                +1
                It is clear that the MiG-31 is purely ours, the radical modernization of the “twenty-fifth”, by the way, “there would have been no happiness, but misfortune helped,” had it not been for Belenko’s betrayal, the MiG-31 might have been born much later. Just looking at the R-33 and Phoenix rockets I just can’t get rid of the feeling that they are “twin brothers”. Well, besides, I just like this "conspiracy" story about the "hijacking" F-14. good
            2. okko077
              okko077 23 May 2019 14: 48 New
              0
              How can one compare a medium-range missile R-33 with a long-range missile? .. The MIG-31 carried only 4 missiles and could launch 2 each. , and the F-14 carried 6 missiles and could launch all six at once ... It is better not to recall the comparative capabilities of guidance systems, their size and reliability ...
        3. doktorkurgan
          doktorkurgan 15 May 2019 07: 49 New
          +1
          The principle of convergence. To obtain a similar result, similar solutions are used.
        4. Sasha_rulevoy
          Sasha_rulevoy 15 May 2019 19: 25 New
          +2
          Quote: varadero
          one F-14 along with missiles was stolen in the USSR in the late 70s.


          Only not in the USSR, but in Iraq in the 80s. One Iranian pilot was staggered by readings of the Koran and prayers for many hours a day. He hijacked the F-14 along with the Phoenix and grabbed the instructions. Saddam gave everything to the USSR. R-33 in appearance is a copy of the Phoenix, and the Phoenix at that time was a unique rocket and ahead of its time in the sense that it has never hit a real target in its history.
          1. boathouse
            boathouse 15 May 2019 19: 31 New
            0
            Now, we are already groping, you look, years later, through ... And, maybe, at least we learn the truth. Thanks a lot! hi
      4. jhltyjyjctw
        jhltyjyjctw 15 May 2019 10: 21 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Was, as Tomkoshk and our MiG-25 and MiG-31 were intended to solve similar problems by similar methods.


        And what is the effectiveness of Tomkoshki in comparison with MiGs? There is information? Or just scratch your tongue?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 14: 09 New
          -2
          Quote: jhltyjyjctw
          And what is the effectiveness of Tomkoshki in comparison with MiGs? There is information? Or just scratch your tongue?

          I do not understand what it was now? :))))) Efficiency in what? If in the possibilities of defeating long-range URVV targets, then here in a cat with MiG-31 the situation is close to parity. If the part of the destructive functions, the cat is better. If in terms of combat statistics, the planes participated in the conflicts, they were shot down, they were shot down (MiG-25 and Tomkat, MiG-31 did not fight), it’s hard to distinguish who is better, it’s not only the number of victories
      5. Oden280
        Oden280 15 May 2019 15: 51 New
        +1
        Absolutely incorrect comparison. F-14 is a multi-role fighter designed to gain superiority in the air in the area of ​​the ACG. His classmates are the F-15 and our Su-33. But not like our MIGs, which are pure interceptors.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 18: 30 New
          0
          Quote: Oden280
          Absolutely wrong comparison. F-14 is a multipurpose fighter designed to gain air superiority in the area of ​​the AUG

          The comparison is absolutely correct, because before the F-14 were set including the tasks that were set before our interceptors. Accordingly, the aircraft were equipped with similar equipment, weapons, etc. The fact that the cat came out a bit more universal (although there is something to argue about, because in a maneuverable battle the cat is far from ice) does not prevent
          1. Oden280
            Oden280 15 May 2019 19: 51 New
            +1
            Before any fighter is tasked with interception. But this does not mean at all that the multi-functional fighter will at least somehow come closer to the interceptor in capabilities. On SU-34, V-V missiles are the same, but this does not mean at all that he is a fighter.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              16 May 2019 00: 08 New
              0
              Quote: Oden280
              Before any fighter task is to intercept. But this does not mean at all that a multi-purpose fighter will at least come closer to the interceptor in its capabilities.

              Excuse me, did you even look at Tomket's TTX and its equipment? What kind of fighter is he? As far as possible, I repeat, it is quite comparable with the MiG-31.
              The fact is that the main task of Tomcat, for which the navy actually wanted it, was the interception of the Soviet missile-carriers. From here, a long-range airborne missile defense station, a powerful radar, and a man’s 2 crew, and very limited maneuverability of air combat (but they were better than the MiG). In general, Tomkat took place exactly as an interceptor, as the fighter was so-so
              1. 0ffh
                0ffh 18 May 2019 23: 07 New
                0
                the main task f14 you were correctly told above
                in no way is he an instant-31
                he certainly doesn’t have network capabilities, but mig31 is under this
                and if we talk about aerial combat of the instant 31 - then his far-arm strategy is just a copy of f22
                so we can talk with tightness about the fact that f22 repeats the concept of instant 31 but f14 there is no forest
      6. Doliva63
        Doliva63 15 May 2019 19: 31 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: SETSET
        It is incorrect to write about the F-14A analogues, it has never been an analogue of the Mig-25 and Mig-31 and close.

        Was, as Tomkoshk and our MiG-25 and MiG-31 were intended to solve similar problems by similar methods.

        But, I suspect, not similar opportunities. Therefore, I join in the doubts of Comrade. SETSET.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          16 May 2019 00: 08 New
          0
          Quote: Doliva63
          But, I suspect, not similar opportunities

          In which place dissimilar? Please explain
      7. 0ffh
        0ffh 18 May 2019 23: 03 New
        0
        Mig-25 was created to intercept supersonic bombers - the hustler was already in service
        and the Valkyrie was tested with press coverage
        MiG-31 was already created as an air defense plane covering the vast expanses of the north
        where are the similar requirements of the twinks and f14?
        Ф14 was created absolutely for other purposes - a typical multi-purpose aircraft for the fleet
        and bomb and fight in the air
        Migi finally can not fighters in the air
        at instant 25 maximum overload 6
      8. Crimean partisan 1974
        Crimean partisan 1974 22 July 2019 05: 36 New
        +2
        to solve similar ... maybe similar but different. Fe-14 can’t distinguish targets against the surface like, say, MiG-31, but for the MiG-25 it was the task of launching explosives and knock down quickly, the missile itself could be launched by the A-40, the difference is huge,
        it’s understandable with aviation, although in the case of the destroyer URO Starkev the 89th was fun, but about 30 diesel-electric submarines in Iran are still powerful. the more successful tests of the analogue of our VA-111 will not give any chances to an aircraft carrier, even in the Arabian Sea, the decisiveness of the armed forces of Iran is another matter
  2. sagitch
    sagitch 14 May 2019 18: 16 New
    +6
    So Pompeo flew to Moscow on behalf of President Trump, allegedly in order to establish relations with Russia ...
    All this is another tricky US plan, before the invasion of Iran.
    Chatting, promising, beautifully telling the world about their peaceful intentions, with an unfounded proposal to destroy nuclear weapons.
    America, if Russia supports Iran, the whole world will say that they say we came with good intentions, the whole world has heard! But Russia is in conflict, violating peace agreements.
    BOTTOM LINE:
    America is “white and fluffy,” although it has attacked Iran, and Russia is an “aggressor,” a violator of a peaceful convention.
    1. Romario_Argo
      Romario_Argo 14 May 2019 19: 29 New
      +2
      Russia is more likely to quickly transfer and transfer to Iran a universal package of military assistance
      by analogy with Syria, the mass of options
      1. albert
        albert 14 May 2019 20: 11 New
        -1
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        Russia is more likely to quickly transfer and transfer to Iran a universal package of military assistance
        by analogy with Syria,

        In this case, China will not be aloof.
        1. IL-18
          IL-18 14 May 2019 21: 18 New
          +8
          China will stay on the sidelines. Example: Syria.
          1. Aspis
            Aspis 16 May 2019 03: 08 New
            0
            Yes you guessed! The main supplier of oil to China in general crazy at least think
      2. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 14 May 2019 21: 42 New
        +3
        Quote: Romario_Argo
        Russia is more likely to quickly transfer and transfer to Iran a universal package of military assistance
        by analogy with Syria, the mass of options


        Yeah ...
        How are you ...
        Russia could not transfer the already paid S-15s for 300 years ...
      3. PROXOR
        PROXOR 16 May 2019 12: 39 New
        0
        For example, the container version of the PKO Club))))
    2. jhltyjyjctw
      jhltyjyjctw 15 May 2019 10: 22 New
      +3
      Quote: sagitch
      All this is another tricky US plan, before the invasion of Iran.


      The US will not attack Iran. They can’t do anything, just cheeks.
      1. NEOZ
        NEOZ 15 May 2019 17: 49 New
        0
        Quote: jhltyjyjctw
        They can’t do anything, just cheeks.

        tell it to the Iraqis ...
        1. meandr51
          meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 14 New
          0
          Now is not 91 years old. In Iraq, they gathered strength for six months to win a tiny Kuwait. They cannot do anything with Iran.
  3. Ravil_Asnafovich
    Ravil_Asnafovich 14 May 2019 18: 29 New
    +1
    mattress heads can wreak havoc on one thing.
  4. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 14 May 2019 18: 35 New
    0
    Yes, nothing will happen, they recently scared Kim, he only laughed in response.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 14 May 2019 18: 52 New
      +8
      One remark: Kim has nuclear weapons, but the Persians do not yet ..
      1. Elena Filatova
        Elena Filatova 14 May 2019 20: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: 210ox
        Kim has nuclear weapons, but the Persians do not yet ..

        And this is still unknown
        1. Maki Avellevich
          Maki Avellevich 14 May 2019 21: 14 New
          +1
          Quote: Elena Filatova
          Quote: 210ox
          Kim has nuclear weapons, but the Persians do not yet ..

          And this is still unknown

          But what is the meaning of nuclear weapons, but no one should talk about this?
          1. jhltyjyjctw
            jhltyjyjctw 15 May 2019 10: 23 New
            0
            Quote: Maki Avellevich
            But what is the meaning of nuclear weapons, but no one should talk about this?


            Why is it for Israel?
            1. Maki Avellevich
              Maki Avellevich 15 May 2019 19: 48 New
              0
              And we don’t have it smile
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 22: 09 New
      +2
      Quote: Pessimist22
      they scared Kim, he only laughed in response.

      They are Kim still not scared. And there are doubts that they will begin.
      1. meandr51
        meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 15 New
        0
        The more scare him, the more expensive it will cost.
  5. looker-on
    looker-on 14 May 2019 18: 38 New
    12
    Andrei, thank you very much! This year you just have a multiple increase in productivity by articles ... and personally to me they are all extremely interesting. Thank you for your work!
    It would be great if you also described the countermeasures procedures on the American side. Given the security in the form of 5-6 Burks, there will be a couple of hundred anti-ballistic missiles there. And also a volcano-phalanx and so on. Not just going to happen even with the mass launch of missiles (Iran)
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 22 New
      +3
      You're welcome, Ilya, glad you liked it!
      Quote: looker-on
      It would be great if you described more countering procedures from the American side.

      Think :)
  6. Maalkavianin
    Maalkavianin 14 May 2019 18: 42 New
    0
    No chance. Paint on an aircraft carrier if they accidentally scratch it.
  7. Medvezhya lapa nad Ki
    Medvezhya lapa nad Ki 14 May 2019 18: 43 New
    -7
    The radius of dispersal of aircraft with AUG, plus the radius of missiles. Minus pkr What will happen?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 22 New
      +2
      Quote: Medvezhya lapa nad Ki
      The radius of dispersal of aircraft with AUG, plus the radius of missiles. Minus pkr What will happen?

      Absolutely nothing significant figure :)))
  8. donavi49
    donavi49 14 May 2019 18: 49 New
    13
    There is one thing - a critical assumption. 1 AUG is taken and all the country's Air Forces = that is transferred to a spheroon vacuum.

    Basic aviation on the other side of the gulf (and we’ll paddle here for the UAE and Saudi Arabia + Israel will fit in if not from hour 1, then after the first arrivals of the OTRK, which will probably be). Other forces.

    Again, the AUG will not enter the Bender-Abbas raid, but will actively maneuver, and not in the bay, but in the Arabian Sea. Iran will have to solve the problem of finding the ACG.

    On the other hand, according to the AUG and not only (also tankers available in the bay, including the UAE and the Saudis), they will actively work as a fleet, including high-speed boats with anti-ship missiles (but this will be relevant for the bay), submarines, and land mines the strait. Trucks with fruits, nuts, Persian carpets, of this type, will enter the coastal zone.


    In general, everything depends on the authorized scale and who will plan. If Biden’s participation is limited to pushing through the operation, and Trump says in the words “Failure should not be!”, Competent people will consider the operation and outfits. Then I put that the organized resistance of the Air Force / Air Defense of Iran will end from 3 to 7 days. Further only short-range air defense systems (of the Krotal / Rapira type) and single surviving complexes / vehicles.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 19: 39 New
      +5
      Quote: donavi49
      There is one thing - a critical assumption. 1 AUG is taken and all the country's Air Forces = that is transferred to a spheroon vacuum.

      This is not a spheroconical vacuum, but the answer to the question whether the forces sent to the coast of Iran can "punish" Iran themselves.
      Quote: donavi49
      Again, the AUG will not enter the Bandar Abbas raid, but will actively maneuver, and not in the bay, but in the Arabian Sea.

      Everything is possible, but for serious work along the coast of AUG you will have to come close enough to the coast. In the Arabian Sea, it can only pinch the Arabian coast.
      Quote: donavi49
      Iran will have to solve the problem, searching for AUG.

      I described these features.
      Quote: donavi49
      Then I put that the organized resistance of the Air Force / Air Defense of Iran will end from 3 to 7 days.

      Well, the famous General Van Riper, who used the potential of Iran during headquarters games, defeated the US AUG does not agree with you
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 14 May 2019 19: 59 New
        +7
        Well, that’s how they will gradually push. They’ll come closer when they’ll demolish everything dangerous (with the exception of trucks - which either carry carpets to the bazaar, or it’s an impact machine, and now a couple of Nurovs will fly).

        Again - only US bases on the other side of the Gulf + Israel will be substituted for the first retaliatory strike. There will be real exchange and the greatest risk of loss.

        Do not forget about the Air Force (and not only the United States). About the axes - which will again be collected by 100 + into the wave (if, again, this is normally planned). About DongPhenes3 even, from the kingdom. No wonder the Saudis bought them. By the time the AUG comes closer to bomb deep areas = Iran’s air defense umbrella will be broken, and only the crumbs will remain from the Air Force. What, in fact, I pointed out. If there is a full-fledged operation planned by the military, then the AUG will not be substituted for the first time, while the airbases / air forces and air defense will be milled.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2019 21: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: donavi49
          Well, so they will be crushed in stages.

          Dreary, difficult and dangerous. Because it is possible only in the “hit-and-run” mode and the AUG is substituted at the time of the raid.
          Quote: donavi49
          the moment when the AUG comes closer to bomb the deep areas = the Iranian air defense umbrella will break, and only the crumbs of the Air Force will remain.

          Not. In fact, Iran’s air defense, albeit old, is decent, so it’s not easily broken. Just pass on the experience of the Desert Storm to Iran - the MNF has used a huge amount of aircraft, and still a significant part of the Iraqi Air Force has survived
          Quote: donavi49
          If there is a full-fledged operation planned by the military, then the AUG will not be substituted for the first time

          What, in fact, and speech.
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 21: 20 New
        +4
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Well, the famous General Van Riper, who used the potential of Iran during headquarters games, defeated the US AUG does not agree with you

        This is a pretty famous story. Comrade Van Rieper is a rotten cheater, and the vaunted DAPRA programmers who wrote the software for the exercises are the crooked pests that belong to the American Gulag.
        To simulate such a large-scale exercise, the JSAF Joint Semi-Automated Forces program developed by DARPA was used. This powerful simulator reproduced the tactical situation with all its nuances, including weather, the movement of neutral forces and civilian transport. He allowed a significant breadth of settings, and could be adapted to almost any necessary situation.
        So, MC2002 began with the fact that the “Blue” fleet approached the combat area and put forward an “ultimatum” to the “Red”, demanding surrender within 24 hours. After the ultimatum expired, the Blues began to launch air strikes on the Red’s military facilities, and moved an amphibious escort escorted by warships to the landing area. Van Rieper responded by setting out to sea many civilian boats and inflatable motor boats that circled the gulf, depicting warships and trying to overload the understanding of the “Blue” situation with many contacts. However, the Blues believed that they were in control, and ordered their fleet to be sent to the landing area.

        And here JSAF made a mistake. Trying to simultaneously regulate the movement of many civilian, “Blue” and “Red” units, the system elementarily mixed up who controls it and integrated the “Blue” fleet into the civil traffic of the Persian Gulf. As a result, the “Blue” naval forces suddenly found themselves “teleported” in full force to the very coast of the enemy, and the ships were “squeezed” into the free spaces of the civil shipping lines. And most importantly - they were a few miles from the inflatable motor boats and pleasure boats Van Rieper, sadly cut circles in the waves.

        Van Ripper did not miss such a chance. While the stunned “Blue” tried to figure out what exactly happened and why they suddenly found themselves in such a strange situation, Van Rieper ordered the “Red” forces to deliver a massive strike against anti-ship missiles. At the same time, however, one small problem arose - the boats and motorboats of Van Rieper, according to the parameters he had previously set, only represented themselves as warships. But Van Rieper solved the problem simply: he simply stated that he had installed P-15M missiles (on his ships). And all at once. In one salvo, Van Rieper shot the entire reserve of anti-ship missiles allotted by the “Red”, which in a magical way were absolutely all focused on specifically these boats.

        As the JSAF pushed warships into civilian traffic, its active defense segments refused to turn on because they confused their own, civilian and enemy ships. An investigation of the incident revealed that the developers borrowed these parts of the program from an early marine simulator, which was calculated to simulate situations in the open ocean, and simply could not act in conditions of dense sea traffic. As a result, the Blues were forced to disconnect Aegis (since the program stubbornly believed that it was not on the ships on which it should actually be) and defend themselves from a massive attack using only autocannons and short-range missiles.

        (c) one of your old acquaintances.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2019 21: 35 New
          +5
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Tov. Van Riper is a rotten cheater, and the acclaimed DAPRA programmers who wrote the exercise software are Krivoruk pests who have a place in the American GULAG.

          There is another point of view - all this is just a pitiful excuse for those who "played" for the blue ones :))))
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 22: 15 New
            +4
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            There is another point of view

            There is. Van Riper himself.
            1. Town Hall
              Town Hall 15 May 2019 17: 42 New
              +1
              All the same, you are a cruel person)
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              15 May 2019 18: 18 New
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              There is. Van Riper himself.

              I believe that not only him. Those teachings - it was a large project with a good investment of money, according to the results of which the American strategy did not win :)))
              Naturally, those in charge had a great desire to explain all the program malfunctions and the van Rieper fly-cart. But to believe such statements ... well, you can, of course. If you really want :))
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                15 May 2019 18: 44 New
                0
                I, of course, to the fonseppelinu with all respect, but he is fond of nature. He simply did not pay attention to some obvious inconsistencies of the text he translated. for example this
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                At the same time, however, there was one small problem - the boats and Van Riper motorboats, according to the parameters previously established by him, only pretended to be warships. But Van Riper solved the problem simply: he simply stated that he had installed П-15М missiles (to his ships). And all at once.

                In short - this is nonsense. On any exercises there are observers who control the actions of the parties, and if van Rieper had not given the command to install these missiles in advance, his statements would have no weight, they would simply be canceled, and right there.
                And this is just one example.
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 20: 03 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  He simply did not pay attention to some obvious inconsistencies of the text translated by him. for example this

                  You see. An animeshnik agronomist, to the best of his ability, translates a long text in the fascist language.
                  https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2002/09/mil-020917-dod01b.htm
                  I read it in passing, I could not find it about self-propelled rockets, but there are quite a lot about the fleet’s blink.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    16 May 2019 07: 18 New
                    0
                    Quote: Cherry Nine
                    I read it in passing

                    Well, it's harder for me to translate, I'll see at my leisure. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the arbitrariness of van Rieper, no one would have suffered
                    1. Cherry Nine
                      Cherry Nine 16 May 2019 09: 41 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Nevertheless, the fact remains that no one would have suffered Van Rieper’s arbitrariness

                      Listen to what “remains a fact” and what it means would not tolerated. We are not discussing AI.

                      There is information on the situation that fonTs leads, which I did not find on his link. If you fundamentally figure it out, fonTs is alive and well, it seems. I have never contacted him, but you can try.
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        16 May 2019 11: 41 New
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Listen to what it means to "remain a fact" and what it means to not suffer. We are not discussing AI.

                        Yes that means. There are certain rules for conducting exercises and maneuvers (including staff games), which go almost from the time of the King of Peas, and according to which such tricks are simply impossible. Point.
                        Any party in such games always has the opportunity to “podmishulit” the result, adjusting the deployment of its own troops with the “backward mind”, that is, already facing an adversary and understanding how best to act. To prevent this from happening, there are mediators to whom both the "red" and "blue" report their actions. And if the same van Rieper tried to take advantage of the situation, he would be stopped right there.
                        So what we are discussing here is the AI, and the AI ​​is “signed” by someone from their American officials. That’s all. Well, or maybe an incorrect translation, which I doubt, since fonceppelin usually translates correctly.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        There is information on the situation, which leads vonTs, which I did not find on his link

                        And I say that if this information exists in reality, then it is obviously false, and pursues only the goal of saving the uniform of those who opposed van Rieper. The proof is given above.
                      2. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 16 May 2019 11: 57 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        The proof is given above.

                        Yes, quite hard.

                        What you brought is not evidence, but your thoughts. The evidence is to gather the people who were there, including BP, and ask them what was there. (even so, since objective data are unlikely to show us). I think it was done, but digging into scrap in the American net.

                        Part of the problem that you noticed is even more local - to find the source of information from the background. There will be a source - it will be possible to understand further.
                      3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        16 May 2019 12: 19 New
                        0
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        Yes, quite hard.

                        No, just very easy.
                        Quote: Cherry Nine
                        What you have brought is not evidence, but your thoughts.

                        These are not my considerations, but the ABC of military science that the US knows quite well. You see, you can’t shoot a cannon around the corner, if you put it on its side, that’s what they propose to believe in you. Because I can repeat again - believe what you want, at least in a flat land. But the fact remains that van Rieper strongly trampled on the blisters with the “red” that opposed him and their motive for lying is simply classical. Alas, their explanations, which are given in the open press (if given, because, I see, there is also some confusion in the sources), are very unprofessional and are designed for people extremely distant from military affairs.
    2. Scaffold
      Scaffold 15 May 2019 07: 01 New
      +4
      The nine who have written at least three lines of program code in their lives understand that the above is feverish delirium. wassat
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 07: 05 New
        0
        Quote: Scaffold
        The nine who have written at least three lines of code in their lives understand

        Who wrote exactly three lines, usually understands only a lot.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 18: 19 New
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Who wrote exactly three lines, usually understands only a lot.

          But the one who has not written one understands even more ....
  • Krasnodar
    Krasnodar 14 May 2019 18: 54 New
    +6
    Amers also has an air force base in Qatar. It seems there is also a couple
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 May 2019 19: 02 New
      +2
      Quote: Krasnodar
      Amers also has an air force base in Qatar

      There is. There are airfields of the allies, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait ... Previously, there was also Pakistan, but the "exceptional" it was exclusively lost by the army method 8)))

      But all the same, a question arises for a couple of tens of billions of dollars: why, in fact, is there a need for AUG?
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 20: 19 New
        +8
        Quote: Spade
        There is. There are allied airfields

        There are about a dozen of their own American bases. In all countries of the region + in Afghanistan, including Bagram.
        Quote: Spade
        But why, in fact, do they need AUG?

        There’s no reason, but the Navy will be offended if they are not called.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 14 May 2019 20: 27 New
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          There are about a dozen of their own American bases.

          Not all of them are capable of providing combat use of aviation.
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          + in Afghanistan, including Bagram.

          But this is unlikely. It is already difficult to import materiel there, and with the outbreak of war it is completely impossible.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 20: 39 New
            +4
            Quote: Spade
            Not all of them are capable of providing combat use of aviation.

            Almost all. Qatar, Oman, UAE, 2 Kuwait, Bahrain.
            Quote: Spade
            It is already difficult to import materiel there, and with the outbreak of war it is completely impossible.

            And who will interfere? Pakistanis will start to bring down transport workers?
            In any case, the a / b in Afghanistan poses a threat from the northeast, wasting away air defense resources.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 14 May 2019 20: 57 New
              +2
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              And who will interfere? Pakistanis will start to bring down transport workers?

              Pakistan under the Chinese. Iran is the hydrocarbon barrel of China.
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              wasting away air defense resources.

              8))))
              Aviation in Afghanistan by no means will be able to prevent attacks on tankers.
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 22: 22 New
                +6
                Quote: Spade
                Pakistan under the Chinese.

                So what? The Chinese will inspire them to shoot down American planes?
                Quote: Spade
                Iran is the hydrocarbon barrel of China.

                One of. 4th or 5th in terms of imports.
                Quote: Spade
                Aviation in Afghanistan by no means will be able to prevent attacks on tankers.

                Iranian Air Defense Resources. Tankers of the dead Khattabys are unnecessarily. By the way, tankers can at least drown everything, Americans on the drum, they are now self-sufficient. This may hurt the priest of euronics and Asians.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 15 May 2019 07: 48 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  So what? The Chinese will inspire them to shoot down American planes?

                  Fighting in Iran, the United States will also begin to illegally invade the closed airspace of Pakistan?

                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  One of. 4th or 5th in terms of imports.

                  One of the main, cheapest and most reliable. Thanks to the Americans.

                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Tankers of the dead Khattabys are unnecessarily.

                  Dear, remember the story. Iran-Iraq with the use of WMD it was much, much worse. And nothing, quite survived.

                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  By the way, tankers can at least drown everything, Americans on the drum, they are now self-sufficient. This may hurt the priest of euronics and Asians.

                  8))))
                  We have a global economy outside the window. Therefore, the Americans will have to pay the same 400 bucks. Even in Russia there will be 400 oil, and this will not add to the popularity of the Americans. Amid their aggression against an independent sovereign country. Is it necessary to clarify that American diplomacy is so strange. that the option of Iraq or Libya in the UN will not work. Guaranteed.
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 09: 20 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Spade
                    will begin to illegally invade Pakistan's enclosed airspace?

                    And how are they poor fighting now?
                    Quote: Spade
                    One of the main, cheapest and most reliable.

                    The Chinese have a lot of basic. Reasonable people. However, now, for example, deliveries have been curtailed, once again they are not running up. Intelligent people, again.
                    Quote: Spade
                    Therefore, the Americans have to pay the same 400 bucks

                    These 400 bucks will go into the pocket of American companies. So they will survive.
                    Quote: Spade
                    option of Iraq or Libya to the UN will not pass

                    As if the UN from New York were not expelled already. Will sit in Russia, like Snowden.
          2. Dmitry Vinner
            Dmitry Vinner 16 May 2019 10: 26 New
            0
            = It is already difficult to import materiel there, and with the outbreak of war it is completely impossible. = Why? And Egyptian Alexandria? What about Israeli Haifa? There will be no obstacles from one of these countries. Believe me.
      2. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 14 May 2019 20: 35 New
        +2
        1) Ponty - psychological pressure, a demonstration of determination, a tense atmosphere, a dramatic step
        2) An increase in strike force near Iran
        3) Ponte in front of the allies - here I go again ...
      3. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 15 May 2019 07: 57 New
        0
        Quote: Spade
        But why, in fact, do they need AUG?

        and. Without frank large-scale redeployment of strike reinforcements to the Allied airfields closer to Iran - a purely demonstration of the flag and rotation of the fleets. An example is a similar bluff of an AUG going “crush” to the DPRK.
        b. The option of diverting attention from joint attacks with Iran on Iranian nuclear facilities is unlikely. By the way, the author somehow missed the likely participation of this very interested comrade with BV.
        with. Planned exercises in areas close to probable theater of operations. The withdrawal from the warrant of the Spanish frigate F-104 Mendes Nunez is most likely agreed at NATO level to giveоOverweight American aggressive rhetoric.

        In any case, against the Iranian shock-defensive potential alone AUG is not enough. The author, in fact, appreciated only the possibilities of “the wings of Iran vs. the wings of Abraham Lincoln”. For a complete picture and possible scenarios, you need to look at the movement and opportunities around the whole of Iran.
  • swzero
    swzero 14 May 2019 19: 01 New
    -1
    And what prevents us or China from supplying Iran with modern aviation missiles? S-300 set the same. And not the fact that this has not already been done, for example, through the same Syria. DPRK-Iran probably also could deliver something anti-ship, they in the field of armament collaborated in my opinion. There is no information about what Iran really has now.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 14 May 2019 20: 46 New
      +4
      Do we have these missiles? And how long will it be adapted to the existing fleet and taught how to use it. These are not stones for a slingshot. I even omit the question: why do we need it /
      1. swzero
        swzero 14 May 2019 21: 02 New
        -1
        then, that Iran is our only geopolitical ally in this region, except for Syria lying in ruins. And actually in the fight against terrorists in Syria, Iran plays a huge role. Destroy Iran, Syria will fall. And indeed there are not so many potential allies in the confrontation with the USA to watch how they are being destroyed.
        1. Kenxnumx
          Kenxnumx 14 May 2019 21: 35 New
          +3
          Firstly, we have nothing that can help them, secondly, they do not have time to master and adapt, and thirdly, Iran is never our ally, but a competitor. And in Syria too.
          1. swzero
            swzero 14 May 2019 21: 38 New
            0
            And in what way is he a competitor to us? Venezuela is also a competitor?
            1. Kenxnumx
              Kenxnumx 14 May 2019 21: 39 New
              +1
              Thank you for reminding me. Venezuela too. In the oil market.
              1. swzero
                swzero 15 May 2019 08: 35 New
                -3
                And what is competition on the oil market?
                1. Kenxnumx
                  Kenxnumx 15 May 2019 22: 57 New
                  +1
                  Even some. Throats tear each other. If staff members strangle Iran - we will directly benefit.
        2. Andrey VOV
          Andrey VOV 15 May 2019 10: 16 New
          +1
          I would not consider Iran as our ally .... I did not consider ... in Syria it would be easier for sure if Iran had not participated there and had such influence on the leadership and Assad
          1. swzero
            swzero 15 May 2019 11: 09 New
            0
            Without the Iranian volunteers, the Syrian army would not be able to do anything, air strikes without ground operations are useless. Likewise, in Korea, an umbrella would not have saved air defense without Chinese volunteers. Or we would have to send our volunteers with all the consequences.
            1. Andrey VOV
              Andrey VOV 15 May 2019 11: 18 New
              0
              I do not agree completely .. yes, the Iranians took part in ground operations, but not decisive .. as soon as our specialists trained the Syrians, their actions became effective
            2. Kenxnumx
              Kenxnumx 15 May 2019 22: 58 New
              +1
              And there are our PMCs. An Iranian would now leave like that Moor. We are calmer
    2. Alexander Ivanov_4
      Alexander Ivanov_4 17 May 2019 00: 12 New
      0
      to a modern rocket can be attributed R-77 with a launch range at the oncoming lane up to 110km. But for this, the Iranian Air Force complex, even Soviet-made, must be adapted to these missiles. This modernization of aircraft is possible only at Russian airlines, which is long and not very cheap.
      As an option, purchase new Su-30s or later modifications, which is even longer and more expensive.
      For lack of time, both options disappear.
      Remain R-27 of various modifications.
  • Vitaminchik05
    Vitaminchik05 14 May 2019 19: 07 New
    +7
    Iran will not attack AUGs head-on with an outdated fleet - huge losses are guaranteed, but serious damage to AAGs is highly doubtful. But blocking the Strait of Hormuz (or creating its passage extremely dangerous - defiantly sinking a couple of tankers) is real. Also, trying to strike with medium-range ballistic missiles at US bases in the Middle East (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc.) - here, given the weaknesses of the Patriots against such targets, significant losses are guaranteed, plus burning bases or airfields) - will give a significant larger propaganda and “beautiful” picture for TV. It is very real - obsolete missiles launched by the Saudis in Jordan - just from Iran. And it’s better to save and try to use aviation in the border areas, for local clashes, “bites” of the troops of the future coalition (which the states are likely to rivet).
  • bmv04636
    bmv04636 14 May 2019 19: 11 New
    0
    It seems like the Persians have diesel electric submarines I think they will get the amusement of AUG
    1. swzero
      swzero 14 May 2019 19: 15 New
      0
      And by the way, yes - they have halibuts - not the easiest goal. Yes, and surface ships with PCR are available, why the author limited himself to aviation only?
      1. swzero
        swzero 14 May 2019 19: 24 New
        0
        Iran generally has a good set of cruise missiles with very good performance characteristics - for example, Meskat, made on the basis of the X-55, There are also supersonic Zafar and other things, and these are recent developments. There is something for AUG to tackle in addition to the S-802 mentioned by the author. So, with all due respect to the author, he too superficially analyzed the possibilities of Iran, although of course there is little information on Iran.
      2. donavi49
        donavi49 14 May 2019 19: 47 New
        +3
        Surface ships should be divided into two types:
        1) "Destroyers" - which will be killed very quickly, perhaps not in the first place (if they stand in the bases), but as the forces become free. Why? No air defense. A single Harpoon for such a destroyer is more dangerous than for Buyan for:
        The newest Sahand destroyer has - Standard1 air defense with 2 combat-ready missiles, Iranian copy of Oto-Melara 76 and Iranian Gatling Asephe - 23mm (cartridges 23 × 152) + 2х2 anti-ship missiles Nur. Sami count the chances to fight off even a single Hornet with 2 RCC Harpoon.



        Others have FM-80 - Krotal, although not an American complex, but the same generation before last and well known to Americans. Part of the corvette frigates in general can only in the MANPADS from the shoulder.


        2) Small boats, fast, inconspicuous, with the ability to maneuver not only by sea, but also by land. They can spoil the blood in the Gulf. But not at sea.

    2. donavi49
      donavi49 14 May 2019 19: 32 New
      +3
      Only if the AUG enters the Bender-Abbas raid. In the Arabian Sea will not reach. There are still chances in the Gulf. Although rather - they will hit the tanker and are busy mining the strait and the bay.

      There are 3 boats of the 877 project, but this is a list. Boats are maintained and repaired on their own. At the last parade there was only 1 the newest - Yunes, it also went out of repair in the 2016 year (judging by the abaza).


      The main boat of Ghadir is 120, 2 torpedoes (or mines). Built more 20 pieces.


      The newest and most advanced Iranian Fateh boat is the 1 in service, one in construction. She is the only one who can launch Chinese anti-ship missiles.




      The result is outside the Persian Gulf, 1-3 - Ave. 877 and 1 Fateh can act. The rest is only in the Gulf.
      1. swzero
        swzero 15 May 2019 09: 33 New
        -2
        And halibuts do not have RCC-club-S? Could they get them, or the Chinese anti-ship missiles during the modernization? Of halibuts - Tareq was still repaired and modernized in 2012 - must be combat-ready. So halibut 2 at least. Well, it’s not a fact that Noor is not repaired, it would not be logical. By the way, and at what distance can the HAC 877EKM detect AUG?
        1. donavi49
          donavi49 15 May 2019 09: 43 New
          +2
          Which Club (non-existent in Iran by the way)? These are boats of the 90's. The only 877 retrofits that took place were Indians. And at 2 refit (6 boats from 9).

          Perhaps it is only POSSIBLE, they with Chinese help retrofitted them to YJ-82 = identical missiles, as on Fateh (underwater version of the C-801 missile).
    3. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 22 July 2019 07: 47 New
      +2
      the Persians have submarines ... there are, about 30. and there is a flurry of va-111 to them. moreover, on a stationary target they can naughty up to 20 km. and control the cable for 8 km, that is, the aircraft carrier will have about 80 seconds to repel the attack with a barrage. interception is excluded, falling in the midship area below the water 200 kg warhead is practically the death of any craft
  • Asan Ata
    Asan Ata 14 May 2019 19: 14 New
    +3
    You forgot about a blow to the head. It seems to me that we are talking about Iranians in the United States, of whom there are several million. Moreover, I am sure that every second among them will be martyrs. Therefore, before attacking, you need to turn around and evaluate how many evil eyes look in your back.
    1. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 20: 27 New
      +2
      Quote: Asan Ata
      Iranians in the USA, of whom there are several million

      from 500 thousand to 1 million
      Quote: Asan Ata
      Moreover, I am sure that every second among them will be martyrs.

      There will be no martyrs there at all - there was no reason to leave Iran so quickly to get to the guria. Maybe, of course, a couple of patients from young animals will come across, like this Boston Chechen with a samovar, but no more.

      There will certainly be more Persian volunteers at American recruiting stations, but hardly so many. Of course, I would like to free my homeland from the Khattabychi, but, again, they did not go to Iran for freedom for Iran. Both in education and in income, the Persians (like muslims) are above the average for the United States, they and so the norms.
      1. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 15 May 2019 08: 04 New
        -2
        I would be more worried about the CIA. Again for the “incident belli” they allegedly “missed out” some “controlled” terrorist attack and an analogue with the twin towers and the Pentagon ram was released ...
        Again, it will be very convenient to blame Trump for everything, who does not listen to the security forces and special services. Knowing that Americans always love to get the most out of one action, I personally do not exclude this repetition at all.
  • Vitaminchik05
    Vitaminchik05 14 May 2019 19: 15 New
    +5
    In dogonku.
    Air defense, if it is not layered, and with the use of aviation - the United States will be able to suppress in a few days. And they won’t save a couple of S-300 divisions - they won’t survive a massive missile strike (like command posts, radar stations, etc.). When attacking such a country, missile strikes will be from HUNDRED missiles. All that will survive, when the radar is turned on, the US / coalition aircraft that are flailing will bombard with dozens of anti-radar missiles, and the AWACS can direct fighters to any flying target. You should not flatter yourself about this - there is a gap between the armies of Iran and the USA.
    1. swzero
      swzero 15 May 2019 10: 03 New
      -1
      And why do you think that Iran’s air defense is not layered? In addition to the S-300, they also have other systems, of the most modern ones, the tor-m1 and a certain amount of shell-s1. Aviation is also available. Like a large number of radars and air defense. Everything necessary for building layered air of Iran is available.
  • Lesorub
    Lesorub 14 May 2019 19: 47 New
    +4
    Iran has practically no chance in an open confrontation with the United States and Israel, “the war will go on in one gate”, the Tomahawks are gouging, after being ironed by aviation, there is too much lag in military technology. At least, Iran needs to buy either Su 30MK2, Su 35, C 300 or 400, but things are still there.
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 14 May 2019 19: 53 New
      +4
      Su-30MK2 - only possible on the secondary. The production line in Komsomolsk is closed. And honestly, according to the Americans, it’s the Komsomol sides that will be very so-so. For the radar and the ancient penny and over-maneuverability have not been delivered, as the engines are old without OBT.

      Su-30СМ - yes. And as for the rest of the Su-35 and others = Russia supports the UN document on Iran. 5 years ban on the supply of offensive weapons. Therefore, even if Iran does not mind, then Russia is not selling. And China too. That is, this is a visible type of weapons - and its appearance cannot be hidden. Russia and China refuse to be substituted. Yes, and Iran does not have much money.
      1. Alexander Ivanov_4
        Alexander Ivanov_4 17 May 2019 00: 51 New
        0
        MAY substitute, for example, Abkhazia.
        A new law on arms export was adopted and entered into force in Russia the other day. According to this law, sold military equipment is considered the property of the buyer and further sale of this equipment to any other entity / state is possible. At the same time, Russia relieves responsibility for its application. This law is analogous to the state law, when MANPADS and other "cherries" labeled "made US" are used by terrorists all over the world, and the Pentagon is not involved in business, saying that we didn’t deliver / sell them.
  • Sergei 777
    Sergei 777 14 May 2019 19: 52 New
    +2
    Well, in general, I agree with the analysis. But there are nuances. To consider the Iranian Air Force separately from the Navy is one-sided. Still, the army is a complex thing.
    And the blow with axes on the bases of the air force should also be taken into account.
    And further. In theory, all Iranian aircraft can be thrown into battle as part of a single operation to destroy the AUG, but I think it will be very difficult to hide preparations for it from the intelligence of the United States and Israel.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: Sergey 777
      But there are nuances. Considering the Iranian Air Force separately from the Navy is one-sided. Still, the army is a complex thing.

      So yes, but it will not fit into one article any more :))))
      Quote: Sergey 777
      And the blow with axes on the bases of the air force should also be taken into account.

      I took it into account, specifying the preliminary dispersal of the Air Force from its bases as a mandatory action.
  • bbtcs
    bbtcs 14 May 2019 20: 14 New
    0
    Quote: Lesorub
    At least, Iran needs to buy either Su 30MK2, Su 35, C 300 or 400, but things are still there.

    Nothing will happen. Nefig and carry.
  • Comrade
    Comrade 14 May 2019 20: 32 New
    +1
    Andrey, a class, read the article in one breath. Thank !
    And we wish the Iranians, in which case, good luck.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 30 New
      0
      Quote: Comrade
      And we wish the Iranians, in which case, good luck.

      We wish, dear Comrade!
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 14 May 2019 22: 25 New
        +2
        Quote: Comrade
        We wish the Iranians good luck if anything happens.

        The more difficult it will be for the Americans this time, the easier it will be next. And who is next?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 09: 21 New
          +2
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          The harder the Americans will be this time - the simpler the next

          I would say, the harder it will be for them to start this very next one.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 09: 48 New
            +2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            I would say, the harder it will be for them to start this very next one.

            From Vietnam to Grenada - 8 years. Between there was still a small movement.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              15 May 2019 18: 32 New
              +1
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              From Vietnam to Grenada - 8 years.

              I am shocked by such comparisons :)))) I wonder how, at least theoretically, could Grenada threaten an aircraft carrier? :))))
              1. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 20: 41 New
                +1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                I am shocked by such comparisons

                And what do not like?
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                I would say, the harder it will be for them to start this very next one.

                The next little Vietnam war (there were several) began after 8 years, the big one - after 16. So the idea that it would be possible to inject pacifism into the Americans for a long time, until it paid off. The next interesting moment will be the quarter of 2030, when Putin will go on the 7th term. It’s too early to wait in the 24th, unless the Americans in the 20th choose someone completely awesome.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  16 May 2019 00: 19 New
                  0
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  So the idea that Americans will be able to stick pacifism for a long time, while not justifying itself

                  How to say? Grenada is a police action, not a war, and the same goes for Panama. Eldorado Canyon is again a local action, but in reality a serious war was decided only in 16 years. As for me - pacifism was quite decent for them in Vietnam
                  1. Cherry Nine
                    Cherry Nine 16 May 2019 06: 01 New
                    0
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    but a serious war was really decided only after 16 years.

                    From Korea to Vietnam 12
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    quite decently they got pacifism in Vietnam

                    4 of the year?
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      16 May 2019 07: 17 New
                      0
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      From Korea to Vietnam 12

                      In Korea, they didn’t get a bit of it yet; serious pacifist moods were after Vietnam.
                      Quote: Cherry Nine
                      4 of the year?

                      16
                      1. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine 16 May 2019 09: 47 New
                        +1
                        I, apparently, incomprehensibly put it.

                        They won Korea (as they believe), and climbed into the new harlot after 12 years. They lost Vietnam, with all due respect, and climbed into BVP after 16 years. The difference is not so big in terms of time.

                        but

                        they climbed into Vietnam more or less the same as in Korea. In the 91st, there were others in general all. It was Vietnam that forced the Americans to abandon their militia with atomic bombs and make a full-fledged military machine. Not to mention the sharply different adequacy of the State Department and the political leadership.
        2. Doliva63
          Doliva63 15 May 2019 20: 15 New
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Quote: Comrade
          We wish the Iranians good luck if anything happens.

          The more difficult it will be for the Americans this time, the easier it will be next. And who is next?

          Really the Russian Federation ?! But what about the mortgage, car loan? Can I not pay? I have a Citibank, if that. Then I agree laughing
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 20: 34 New
            0
            Quote: Doliva63
            But what about the mortgage, car loan? Can I not pay?

            It is unlikely to have time. For a car loan for sure.
  • boathouse
    boathouse 14 May 2019 20: 40 New
    +3
    Yeah, all the bearded ones scoured, and after all, during the check of the Iranian Air Force in the BV they conceded only, perhaps, to Israel. And in terms of equipment and weapons and in terms of training the flight crew.
  • Essex62
    Essex62 14 May 2019 20: 41 New
    -3
    Mattresses are pushing. Nothing will happen. But the Persians need to seriously turn on and prepare the Amerzians unexpected people in all directions. Including the territory of the shchas. But Russia and China wipe the ban and supply Iran with modern weapons. And then the noodles about the confrontation with the “hegemon” are already stretching from Moscow to Vladik. (Maneuvered, maneuvered, but not caught)
  • Elena Filatova
    Elena Filatova 14 May 2019 20: 47 New
    -5
    And from here follows the second conclusion: the Iranians certainly have the technical ability to defeat a single American AUG, but it’s far from the fact that the professionalism of Iranian pilots and their commanders will allow this

    Russia and China will help you with professionalism / advisers / training, and even intelligence.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: Elena Filatova
      Russia and China will help you with professionalism / advisers / training, and even intelligence.

      Only here that was a sense, it was necessary to start doing it a few years ago.
    2. boathouse
      boathouse 15 May 2019 02: 39 New
      +2
      How will they help? Will they send the globe?
  • Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 14 May 2019 20: 47 New
    +3
    I see no reason for the Americans.
  • Victoria-V
    Victoria-V 14 May 2019 20: 50 New
    +1
    Iran is bluffing. The situation in 2012 is repeating itself.
  • Nikolai
    Nikolai 14 May 2019 20: 56 New
    +5
    AUG nomination is nothing more than a demonstration of strength, presence and control - for the world media. The coalition in this region has enough other air forces and other forces. AUG are grazed by the Chinese, grazed by the Russians. I am sure that the data quickly fall on the desk of the General Staff of Iran. As with North Korea, there will be no war. And if that happens, then Israel and other allies will answer (Iran has missiles).
  • The seventh
    The seventh 14 May 2019 21: 03 New
    -4
    Iranian air force against American AUG. What are the chances?

    No chance. A massive blow by five, six hundred Axes on the first day, I hope, will confirm the Iranian religious leadership in the futility of further resistance and in the absence of the pro-Iranian location of Allah ..
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2019 21: 32 New
      +1
      Quote: SSEDM
      Massive strike with five, six hundred Axes in the first day

      By and large, will not lead to a significant reduction in Iran’s military potential
      1. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 14 May 2019 21: 51 New
        -1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: SSEDM
        Massive strike with five, six hundred Axes in the first day

        By and large, will not lead to a significant reduction in Iran’s military potential


        Will lead to that. what is called the "creation of a no-fly and demilitarized zone" at a distance of up to 150 miles inland from the coastline of Iran.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 09: 04 New
          +2
          Quote: SovAr238A
          Will lead to. what is called the creation of a no-fly and demilitarized zone

          It will not lead :)))) What are 500-600 missiles? 60 was hit by rockets on the screen, the next day he continued his sorties. Of course, if you take the Iranians by surprise, you can seriously damage their aircraft, but if they disperse it in time, then nothing terrible will happen
          1. Rico
            Rico 15 May 2019 14: 10 New
            -2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: SovAr238A
            Will lead to. what is called the creation of a no-fly and demilitarized zone

            It will not lead :)))) What are 500-600 missiles? 60 was hit by rockets on the screen, the next day he continued his sorties. Of course, if you take the Iranians by surprise, you can seriously damage their aircraft, but if they disperse it in time, then nothing terrible will happen

            if you think that the airfield is only concrete ... and besides it, everything got burned.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              15 May 2019 18: 58 New
              0
              Quote: Rico
              if you think that the airfield is only concrete ... and besides it, everything got burned.

              If you think that in order for the planes to resume flights, it’s enough just one concrete ... :)))
              in fact, rockets hit part of the vaults and caponiers with combat aircraft inside. And 60 missiles were not enough to disable one airbase - the runway was saved and at least part of the infrastructure
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 16329
      16329 14 May 2019 22: 42 New
      +1
      There will be no massive blow with axes, and the effectiveness of axes when used against military targets covered by air defense and electronic warfare systems is not enough to force the enemy to surrender at once.
      Most likely, the United States will not dare to engage in full-scale aggression against Iran, and limited forceful action in order to support the "internal opposition" is a risky and not guaranteeing success event, most likely some sort of diplomatic action will begin with a demonstration of the power component in order to conclude new agreements with Iran on the nuclear issue internal political orientation in the light of the 2020 elections
    4. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 15 May 2019 08: 27 New
      +3
      500-600 “axes” cannot be launched by one wave of one AUG. Really will come out much less and with intervals between starts.
      1. The seventh
        The seventh 15 May 2019 08: 59 New
        0
        One wave is possible, there will also be PLARK and B-52 and destroyers from the AUG ..
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 15 May 2019 09: 47 New
          +1
          For the indicated you need to fit a couple of other KUGs with the maximum configuration "on the ground" to the going order. UVP cells are not only clogged with tomahawks. The B-52 doesn’t carry tomahawks, since there are no air-based “axes” (conventional ones) in nature, the development of air “axes” (MRASMs) was discontinued in 1984. Stratofortresses can drag AGM- from conventional air-to-surface CRs. 86C CALCM (8 internal compartment, 12 on pylons), AGM-158 JASSM (12 units on external nodes). For a massive strike by the Kyrgyz Republic, plan more mandatory MALD baits and anti-radar baits with electronic warfare, too, someone must launch them to distract, break through and overload the Iranian air defense, i.e. the air wing will be configured in the shock version, the air cover of the entire AUG will not be as intense as in pure defense.
    5. meandr51
      meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 30 New
      +1
      Nothing will be approved. Axes fall en masse on their own. I would have prepared several thousand more false goals. Aviation cannot be defeated, you can only pinch. If the Iranians do not surrender like the Iraqis, but stubborn like the Vietnamese, then the mattresses will end. They will all be beaten all over the world and at the same time.
    6. Crimean partisan 1974
      Crimean partisan 1974 22 July 2019 08: 13 New
      +2
      Massive punch --- funny. a couple of hundred years ago they fired back axes in Syria and bravorously announced this, but they did eat cold water later when it became known that only a couple of dozen axes had reached the target and even they had spanked not for charged targets. we must remember the lessons of the past. NATO members will never turn up with a military mission in the state if they don’t “buy” at least half of the top command personnel of the armed forces of the target, this is a priori after Vietnam
  • Yarhann
    Yarhann 14 May 2019 22: 10 New
    +3
    As for me, there is no chance, simply because the Americans will be the first to strike if they decide to do this - if it is about reality, how it will be.
    They just kill and throw all the airfields, radar and everything that should look for targets, direct aviation, etc., in the WTO. In sum, it seems very doubtful that Iran will be able to lift the necessary group at the same time into the air to cut AUG. BUT if they can, they will receive, for example, intelligence from China wherever it is located, then it is quite possible to cut it clean, that is, to complete disruption.
    But then again - so far, no one except Yapov has attacked the Americans first, usually they are the first to attack.
    And yes, it is not worth evaluating the American Air Force only with the wing of an aircraft carrier, they will easily fly hawks and bombers from the nearest air bases - they have enough tanker planes because it is not a question for them to create a powerful strike air group. Yes, for one powerful blow, but it’s enough, then the air wing will butt itself.
  • NF68
    NF68 14 May 2019 22: 12 New
    +3
    The "weighted" categories of the Iranian Air Force and US Aviation differ markedly and Iran is very inferior to the Americans.
    1. meandr51
      meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 31 New
      +1
      And how Vietnam was inferior to them!
  • Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 14 May 2019 22: 23 New
    +1
    And meet the "Hornet" with his grandfather - F5 Tiger.
    Well, so, to the forces of the strike group from an aircraft carrier, it is also necessary to attribute airplanes from allied bases to BV (American bases).
    So they will crush Iran, no matter how it spins ...
    1. meandr51
      meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 32 New
      0
      Just like Vietnam was crushed.
  • Undecim
    Undecim 14 May 2019 22: 30 New
    +1
    The nuclear carrier “Abraham Lincoln”, security ships ... Unfortunately, there are no data on them, although the composition of the AOG could perfectly clarify the real goals of US politicians.
    Here are those times! How is it not. Leyte Gulf cruiser, missile cruiser and four destroyers: USS Bainbridge, Gonzalez, Mason and Nitze.
  • hohol95
    hohol95 14 May 2019 22: 51 New
    +1
    Pilots of those arrested after the IR had to be released - it turned out that flying on one selfless faith in the sanctity of Khomeini did not work!
    This is well described in his book “The Killer“ MiG. ”F-4 Fighter“ Phantom II ”Haruk A.I.
  • alexmach
    alexmach 14 May 2019 23: 40 New
    +1
    Everything is fine, but what about American forces stationed at land bases? Do you think they will not participate in the hostilities?
  • Old26
    Old26 15 May 2019 02: 04 New
    +3
    By the way, comrades, you also forget about being transferred (or already transferred) to Diego Garcia B-52
  • Alexander Alekseev_2
    Alexander Alekseev_2 15 May 2019 02: 30 New
    0
    Israel, the United Arab Emirates, the Saudis, the Eurupeans and the USE will immediately join the USA ... Escalation - for the sake of de-escalation
  • gregor6549
    gregor6549 15 May 2019 05: 06 New
    +2
    Considering the confrontations of the whole of Iran from the only one AUG of the States without taking into account the more than likely involvement of the Israeli armed forces would not be entirely correct.
    Moreover, in considering a possible conflict, Israel may well play not auxiliary, but a leading role, using, if necessary, its nuclear missile potential and the very sickly Air Force and Navy. Of course, Hezbollah, Hamas and some radical Islamic groups based in Syria will immediately come out on the side of Iran, but Israel has enough strength to dismiss them. If desired, he can completely asphalt Gaza. Previously, he was not allowed to do so. the world community, but under certain conditions, Israel may lightly give a damn about this public. After all, this public was sitting quietly when the Germans bombed the prime minister of Coventry, and the allies of Hamburg did not understand where the military is, and where women, children and the elderly. In war as in war, especially if the war is total. Yes, and to the aid of Saudi Arabia, for which Iran has long been the number of times in the list of the most likely opponents, Israel can count on. And the Saudi Air Force is also very modern and not at all frail.
    Will Russia join Iran? The question is, of course, interesting, but the answer to it will most likely be negative.
    As a buyer of Russian weapons, Iran is still there, but it does not pull on an ally. Rather, the likely opponent of Russia, as well as Turkey. After all, both Iran and Turkey have long wanted to seize areas rich in fish and oil in the southern underbelly of Russia. In general, if a big messilo begins there, then the situation will be both more complicated and more terrible than the situation in Syria was.
    Iran will not regret its soldiers, which was demonstrated in its war with Iraq, and if so, then it is unlikely to go without the use of nuclear weapons there. Fanatics because the threat of death can not be stopped, only by death itself.
    But Russia would be good to stay away from this possible conflict. Not for whom she was there to ruin their people.
  • g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 15 May 2019 08: 51 New
    0
    The theory of "knightly fights" on the example of one AUG against the Iranian Air Force or Armat against Merkava is purely theoretically interesting, but in reality it is of little use for analysis. To the author: Continue further, gradually expanding the coverage of forces in the region. Since purely aviation doctrine has long been a thing of the past, already in 2003 in Iraq the Rumsfeld doctrine was threshing with might and main. The effectiveness of which, compared with 1991, "Desert Storm" looks something like this:
    EFFICIENCY OF THE APPLICATION OF WINGED ROCKETS AND AVIATION IN OPERATIONS AGAINST IRAQ
    (1991/2003):
    and. The use of sea-based cruise missiles
    The number of launches SLCM - 330/800
    The number of targets hit - 60/790
    b. Military aviation application
    The number of sorties of combat aircraft - 41300/45600
    The number of targets hit - 4550/19900
    Losses of aircraft of coalition forces:
    Combat aircraft - 38/1
    Combat Helicopters - 16/6

    (source - Military Review No. 10/2005 p. 37 "Use of US Aviation in the Active Phase of Operation in Iraq," Colonel V. Zayats, Candidate of Military Sciences)
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      15 May 2019 09: 00 New
      +1
      Quote: g1washntwn
      EFFICIENCY OF THE APPLICATION OF WINGED ROCKETS AND AVIATION IN OPERATIONS AGAINST IRAQ

      Well. in the first case, Iraq was armed forces, in the second - was no longer. So the example is incorrect
      1. g1washntwn
        g1washntwn 15 May 2019 09: 14 New
        0
        And this too, but in 1991 there was a different doctrine and only the air component with air strikes, it is precisely this that needs to be compared with your theory.
        What actually I want to summarize - you will not be full of one air.
    2. meandr51
      meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 36 New
      0
      American statistics. It is known that they underestimate losses in manpower by 50 times. And the destruction of targets ... In the 99th, they reported that they destroyed all the Serbian tanks. And they were very surprised that after the end of the war, they suddenly went down the line under their own power.
  • akunin
    akunin 15 May 2019 09: 11 New
    0
    Nevertheless, the author believes that the attempt to “punish” Iran by the forces of one aircraft carrier borders on madness.
    what if
    then we should expect a couple of destroyers "Arly Burke", perhaps instead of one of them will be the missile cruiser "Ticonderoga"

    The main combat missions assigned to the destroyers of the Arly Burke type URO destroyers include:
    Protecting own carrier and ship attack groups from massive missile attacks by an adversary who uses anti-ship missiles launched both from surface ships and from nuclear submarines with missile systems.
    Air defense of one's own forces (naval formations, convoys or individual ships) from enemy aircraft.
    The secondary tasks of ships of this type are:
    Fighting enemy submarines and surface ships;
    Ensuring sea blockade of certain areas;
    Artillery support for landing operations;
    Tracking enemy ships;
    Participation in search and rescue operations.
    Thanks to the combat capabilities of the Aegis system, destroyers of the Arly Burke type are capable of conducting a short-lived three-dimensional battle (while providing anti-aircraft, anti-ship and anti-submarine defense) under conditions of a high degree of threat from the enemy. Compared with the Ticonderoga cruisers, destroyers of the Arly Burke type have smaller overall dimensions, better stability parameters and combat survivability, and are also equipped mainly with later and more advanced modifications of electronic, anti-aircraft missile and artillery weapons systems
    and there is no Iranian aviation.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      15 May 2019 09: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: akunin
      and there is no Iranian aviation.

      There is. Modern surface ships cannot withstand aviation, and Arly Berkov is fully concerned with this. They are an important element of the air defense system of the compound, but will not do much on their own.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 09: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Arly Burkov is fully concerned. They are an important element of the anti-aircraft defense system, but will not do much on their own.

        You insist on spherokonin.

        In order for the Iranians to attack the peacefully sleeping (floating) airfield, you need to find a new Short with Kimmel and a new McCurth. There are certain doubts that this will be possible to do. However, wait and see.
  • Avior
    Avior 15 May 2019 10: 31 New
    +1
    The notions of Van Rieper or "Indian liners" are good for training.
    But in reality, a year after the exercises at which Van Rieper showed his talents, there was a coalition war with Iraq, and the entire Iraqi mosquito fleet was knocked out by ship-based helicopters, without even involving aircraft carriers.
    There is no doubt that there will be no attack on Iran, the Americans will draw such forces to attack to ensure an overwhelming advantage, there will be no noble duels in the style of “AUG against the Iranian Air Force”
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      15 May 2019 14: 12 New
      0
      Quote: Avior
      But in reality, a year after the exercises, in which Van Riper showed his talents, there was a war of kaolition from Iraq, and the entire Iraqi mosquito fleet was knocked out by helicopters.

      Well, in reality, in general, simply overwhelming forces were gathered, so the Iraqis did not even try to do something at sea, but the question of the article is a bit different.
      1. Avior
        Avior 15 May 2019 14: 19 New
        0
        and against Iran they will gather the same, if it comes to war.
        they will not fight with Iran alone AUG.
        So just the exercise scenarios are unrealistic, it turns out
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2019 19: 00 New
          0
          Quote: Avior
          and against Iran they will gather the same, if it comes to war.

          What and speech. Actually, the purpose of the article was whether a single AUG is enough to “curse” Iran.
          Although, by the way, the same as for Iraq will not be collected
          1. Avior
            Avior 15 May 2019 23: 45 New
            -1
            I think, if you really need to, they will collect it.
            It’s another matter that for Iraq they themselves did not expect that they would receive such a great superiority, exceeding all reasonable limits. In reality, Iran does not need such superiority
  • sivuch
    sivuch 15 May 2019 11: 16 New
    0
    In fact, the task of the Iranian Air Force will be to organize an air raid with the entire mass of its capable aircraft, while the Su-24MK and Phantoms will be "hidden" among the mass of Tigers, MiGs and Tomkets
    For these purposes, mankind has come up with MALDs and their analogues. The Persians are quite able to attach Luneberg lenses to the Kyrgyz Republic or drones
    1. Rico
      Rico 15 May 2019 14: 20 New
      0
      Americans live on airfields, they will notice the preparations and strike straight away.
      1. Lena363
        Lena363 15 May 2019 18: 31 New
        0
        Airplanes B-52. The United States will not sit idly by. I agree completely.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 15 May 2019 13: 46 New
    0
    Quote: NEXUS
    if the Iranian air force starts a full-scale attack on the AUG, what is the likelihood that they will not arrive in response, say a couple of missiles with small nuclear weapons?

    And what is the likelihood that after a couple of American missiles with missile defense in response there will not be a pair of Iranian missiles or missile defense with missile defense?
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 15 May 2019 14: 05 New
    0
    The details in the article may be all right. But if you look at the whole ...
    Iran does not need a war with the United States (here Israel is also good at boiling). Countries have too different potentials.
    And the entire scenario described is valid only in the conditions of the Iranian attack. Well, will one aircraft carrier be drowned / damaged? What's next? And there is another war. The whole of Iran will smash the Americans. And there are a lot of dissatisfied obscurantists there.
    But if the United States attacks, then Iran will not be up to these scenarios. But the United States can start a war, because there are enough forces.

    It remains to think why the whole Iranian campaign is needed by the United States? Maybe just an intra-American showdown? Or something more serious?
    The reasons are many.
  • Misha Sorov
    Misha Sorov 15 May 2019 14: 38 New
    +2
    Iran has huge aircraft of about 900 thousand people. Mobilization capacity is 7 million people. There are about 3 Shahab-40 ballistic missiles. Range up to 5000 km. Next Shahab 1-2 about 350 pieces. Not much will appear. Guard Corps Islamic revolution will work on all US bases. And in the USA itself, September 11 will seem like candy for the USA. Finally, Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz. (195 km.) This is 35% of oil export daily. For the USA, this will be the beginning of the end. USA forever stuck in Iran. Iran is not Iraq. The big difference. Therefore, there will be no war. For the United States, this is a shot in the head.
    1. akunin
      akunin 16 May 2019 07: 51 New
      0
      Quote: Misha Litter
      The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps will work across all US bases, and within the United States itself.

      dear, you don’t need to make super soldiers out of “guards”, there were Fedayins at the kindergarten, and the white house still stands (even the paint has not peeled off).
      Iran is not Iraq. Big difference
      can I clarify what, in one letter in the name?
    2. Sasha_rulevoy
      Sasha_rulevoy 16 May 2019 20: 06 New
      0
      Quote: Misha Litter
      There are about 3 Shahab-40 ballistic missiles. Range up to 5000 km. Next Shahab 1-2 about 350. Little will not seem.


      The accuracy of hitting a missile with inertial guidance is so roughly 1% of the firing range. The Shahab warhead is about one ton. The radius of the fragmentation lesion FAB-1500 is somewhere not more than two hundred meters. The nearest US air base in Dammam is about 300 km from the coast of Iran. But to place launchers directly on the shore means to put them under the supervision of AFAR radars of E-8 aircraft patrolling over neutral waters, i.e. a high probability of getting a preemptive strike at the time of preparation for the start. So TPU is better to remove at least another 200 kilometers from the coast. Total: KVO about 5 km. It is clear that even the runway of an airfield is almost impossible to damage, not to mention more sheltered objects.

      "War of the cities"? Suppose Iran decided to fire on Riyadh to force the Saudis to refuse US assistance or even close the American air base. Riyadh is 600 km away. Plus another 200 km. KVO = 800 km. The radius of the inhabited quarters of Riyadh is about 6 km. It is clear that it is possible only in case of rare luck to get into the low-rise area. If the Shahab reaches, does not break, is not shot down, it falls, then the victims will probably be several innocent civilians. It is unlikely that the Saudi kings will greatly scare or upset. Husitic Skuds have already flown to Riyadh several times, but it seems that they have not had any effect on the morale of the Saudis.

      But I would not advise Iran to even touch the Saudis at all. The retaliatory strike will be an order of magnitude more powerful. These are two hundred modern F-15S strike aircraft, analogues of the American F-15E, armed with JDAM bombs with cluster and anti-warfare warheads, which, thanks to the ZhPS guidance, are accurate to ten meters and fly 30 km. 400 tons of air bombs at oil terminals, at naval bases, at government buildings, etc. first day. 400 tons in the second. 400 tons in the third. Finally, unlike Iran, the Saudis can respond with real nuclear weapons. At one time, the Saudis entered into a secret alliance with Pakistan. At one time, the Saudis bought several hundred BRs from China and secretly transferred some of them to Pakistan, but Pakistan did not transfer them in return, but pledged to manufacture and, upon request, urgently transfer, even send by plane, nuclear charges to Saudi Chinese BRs. If the Saudis feel that the matter is bad, they will demand a nuclear warhead from Pakistan. One flight from Pakistan with a pair of warheads. Those will fasten her to Dong-Fen. And Tehran will not be.
  • Lena363
    Lena363 15 May 2019 18: 29 New
    0
    The author forgot that there are B-52 bombers at US bases in the Middle East that can deliver advanced strikes at Iranian airfields. And all these Iranian planes will be defeated or stand on the ground without movement.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      15 May 2019 19: 02 New
      0
      Quote: Lena363
      The author has forgotten that there are B-52 bombers at US bases in the Middle East, which can inflict advance strikes on Iranian airfields.

      I'm afraid you have a bad idea of ​​the possibilities of the B-52 and the capabilities of the air defense of Iran. In addition, I want to note that without a fighter escort, B-52 countries were never thrown at an un-suppressed air defense and air force of the country, and even when they were sent into battle - strictly under the fighter escort
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 15 May 2019 20: 18 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        I'm afraid you have a poor idea of ​​the capabilities of the B-52 and the capabilities of Iran’s air defense.

        Similarly.
        The B-52 can be hung around the Kyrgyz Republic like a Christmas tree with toys. Up to 20 AGM-86C / D CALCM. Moreover, the B-52 is not there alone. Heroes are not required.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          16 May 2019 00: 20 New
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          B-52 can hang a CD like a Christmas tree with toys.

          Can. But for some reason it doesn't work like that :))))))
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 16 May 2019 06: 03 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            it doesn't work like that

            What does "this" not work? MassKR strategists?
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              16 May 2019 07: 16 New
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              What does "this" not work? MassKR strategists?

              Yeah. Well, do not use them so
    2. Alexander Ivanov_4
      Alexander Ivanov_4 17 May 2019 02: 56 New
      0
      Lena363 (Lena). The B-52s are US strategic bombers, almost the only carriers of thermonuclear bombs. To use them for ordinary bombs, if even a couple of square kilometers of terrain is under attack, is not effective from the point of view of combat use. These mastodons were beaten back in the Vietnam War. For the 12 December days of 1972 B-52s made 730 sorties, while they lost 28 vehicles, 29 crew members were killed, the same number were captured. Loss of one B-52 for 26 sorties. isn't it too much? And this is with the use of intense radar countermeasures.
    3. meandr51
      meandr51 14 June 2019 22: 40 New
      0
      In Chechnya, all L-29 and An-2 planes were bombed. So is the war over?
  • Sasha_rulevoy
    Sasha_rulevoy 15 May 2019 19: 41 New
    -1
    The Chinese themselves evaluate the capabilities of the S-802 GOS very highly, believing that the AGSN of these missiles provides a 75% probability of target capture, even in conditions of electronic countermeasures ....


    Shooting by the Hussite Nura (possibly S-802) at the lone Burke. From the coast to a distance of 20 km, i.e. in visual visibility, a clear sunny day, the effect of surprise. Result 0 out of four. Two missiles just flew off to the wrong place, two more Americans put active interference into the Nulka shells.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      16 May 2019 00: 23 New
      0
      Quote: Sasha_rulevoy
      Shooting Hussite "Nurami" (and possibly C-802) at a lonely "Burke."

      There it is very dark - not the fact that Nurami, not the fact that the Hussites, and, what is most funny, not the fact that they shot
  • Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 15 May 2019 22: 59 New
    0
    The Iranians have to give up, then the Americans will run away from the realization that they need to feed such a bunch of prisoners.
  • Old26
    Old26 15 May 2019 23: 39 New
    +2
    Quote: Clever man
    Aviks need at least 2 if there is 1 then nothing. Will be

    A few days ago there was information that in the Mediterranean there were two AUGs. One led by Lincoln, the second with Stennis. It was said that both would go to the Gulf. Then a couple of days of silence and everyone talks about one AUG led by Lincoln

    Quote: Misha Litter
    Iran has huge aircraft of about 900 thousand people. Mobilization capacity is 7 million people. There are about 3 Shahab-40 ballistic missiles. Range up to 5000 km. Next Shahab 1-2 about 350 pieces. Not much will appear. Guard Corps Islamic revolution will work on all US bases. And in the USA itself, September 11 will seem like candy for the USA. Finally, Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz. (195 km.) This is 35% of oil export daily. For the USA, this will be the beginning of the end. USA forever stuck in Iran. Iran is not Iraq. The big difference. Therefore, there will be no war. For the United States, this is a shot in the head.

    Iran has much more mobilization opportunities. He can put up an army of 11 million people. That's just what he will arm her with ..
    A real reserve is about 350 thousand army, a mobilization reserve of 450 thousand and a "Basij" numbering up to 1 million people. Almost 2 million rough. The same "Basidzh" during the Iran-Iraq war EMNIP mine cleared minefields. That is, cannon fodder in fact

    According to reference data, Shahab-3 ballistic missiles are slightly smaller, of the order of 22, although in the last year they may have become a little more. Of 22 - 12 in the mobile version - the modification of GHADR-1 (Gadr-1) and 10 of the same missiles in the mine version. There are some more advanced modifications - Sajjil-2 (Sajjil-2). But with range you got a little excited. Fortunately, they have no missiles with such a range (5000 km). Have a clean one. The Shahab-3 ballistic missile range is 1300 km, the Gadr-1 modification has 1950 km. Sigil-2 has a range of 2000 km.
    The structure of the missile forces of Iran, like the DPRK, differs from the structures of the missile forces of other countries by a large number of missiles with an extremely small number of launchers. The same Shahab-6 and Shahab-1 missiles, Iran has about 2-300 pieces, and launchers from 350 to 12 ... Choose these launchers and what to do with these hundreds of missiles that have nowhere to launch?
    I am afraid that these launchers are unlikely to have time to do more than one salvo with the normal construction of air watch. And in relation to the territory of the USA, it’s not even science fiction

    If Irna closes the Strait of Hormuz, this will not be the beginning of the end of the United States, but Iran. Since Saudi Arabia has oil pipelines extending beyond the strait, and even to the Red Sea, Iran has never built its own pipeline through Pakistan to Indian ports. In fact, the only pipeline with very little throughput that has access to Iran is the pipeline to the Caspian

    So the United States will not be stuck forever in Iran. For several months, they will methodically hammer Iran into the Stone Age. Initially, it is necessary to make air defense and rocket launchers. And then it will be a matter of technology ...
    .
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 16 May 2019 02: 08 New
      0
      Forgot about the B-52, transferred to the region. I didn’t find what “gifts” they bring, but they are probably sickly, and most likely there is no need for bombers to enter the Iranian air defense zone for their use. And there should be no doubt about the ability to deliver a “gift” directly to the window of Khamenei’s office.
      And it’s not necessary to use vigorous weapons. If you snarl with conventional charges over a complex of centrifuges or a warehouse of their products, the radioactive contamination of the area will be no worse than from unconventional ones.
    2. Sasha_rulevoy
      Sasha_rulevoy 16 May 2019 18: 58 New
      0
      Quote: Old26
      everyone is talking about one AUG led by Lincoln




      Yes, the 74th in full swing to America. Undoubtedly, there can be no talk of any war with Iran.
  • Amateur
    Amateur 16 May 2019 17: 41 New
    0
    All planes counted. All bombs rated.
    Missed only one position - pipifax. As the mattress covers end, they will go home.
  • kodeksnet
    kodeksnet 17 May 2019 09: 49 New
    0
    Why is it not being considered that at the time of the operation the American air forces will be strengthened by Israel and Saudi Arabia.
  • swzero
    swzero 17 May 2019 18: 03 New
    -1
    Well, by the way, yes, why the author does not take into account the most effective and simplest way to attack AUG from the tracking regime, which was widely practiced by the USSR. Iran has enough ships to organize AUG escort. TTX for such tactics are secondary. We AUG and even artillery cruisers escorted for a long time. Probably your own aircraft can be accompanied by AUGs, albeit in a small amount, unless of course the radius of action allows or is it possible to refuel in the air. But ships are simpler, and the chance, in the event of the outbreak of hostilities, to deliver a successful strike is greater than then breaking through air defense missions.
  • Svat
    Svat 19 May 2019 05: 06 New
    0
    And suddenly, out of nowhere, something like “Bastion” pops up somewhere on the Iranian coast and flies one rocket .., no, not into an aircraft carrier, but so that it flies nearby ... Well, and some kind of “maaalenka” electronic warfare system ... Well, in the appendage, the armed forces of Iran in practice will experience something very much like the "Dagger" or "Zircon" !!!
    The whole snag is that we reason on the conditions of the absence of unknown factors !!!
  • Bator
    Bator 22 May 2019 07: 13 New
    0
    after comparing F-14 and MIG-25, MIG-31 stopped reading.