Iran claims to have "driven away" the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln with cruise missiles.

Iranian media are publishing some details of the attack on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. A spokesman for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps reported that the US Navy carrier group was attacked by four cruise missiles. rockets at the time of its location at a distance of up to 300 km from the coast of Iran.

From the report:

The enemy aircraft carrier and its escort group were 250-300 km off the coast of Chabahar (an Iranian port on the Arabian Sea). After launching four cruise missiles, it was forced to retreat to the southeastern Indian Ocean.

As a reminder, the US side claimed that Iran posed no threat to the carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln. However, there is growing evidence that, following a report from the carrier strike group commander, Navy command ordered the aircraft carrier to withdraw—precisely after the Iranian attack.

It is not reported whether any serious damage was caused to the aircraft carrier.

Meanwhile, the Americans and Israelis are not slowing down the pace of their strikes against Iran. According to the latest reports, an IRGC intelligence complex in Tehran was attacked. Bombings are also underway against Iranian army positions in border regions and the port area. These latest developments indirectly suggest that the US may be preparing for a ground invasion. However, experts predict that such an invasion, if it occurs, will be limited, and will be in support of the forces the US and Israel have sponsored in the region. One option is Kurdish armed groups.

This, in turn, is also a wake-up call for neighboring Turkey. If the US and Israel succeed in fragmenting Iran through armed Kurds, seizing "Kurdish" provinces, then, despite any intransigence on Ankara's part, something similar could sooner or later follow. Or, at a minimum, it could be used as a lever of pressure in dealing with the Turkish leadership. Considering that the Kurdish population in modern Turkey exceeds 20 million (about a quarter of the country's total population), such pressure could have the most undesirable consequences for the authorities.

Comments

[Murmur 55]

Well, if the ship was seriously damaged, it would have gone to the nearest suitable port or base for repairs. The fact that the aircraft carrier rolled away indicates that the missiles can reach it.

[isv000]

Quote: Murmur 55

Well, if the ship was seriously damaged, it would have gone to the nearest suitable port or base for repairs. The fact that the aircraft carrier rolled away indicates that the missiles can reach it.

The main thing is that it has been removed from the combat zone and, for now, poses no threat to Iran. And that's a result, no matter how you look at it.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: isv000

The main thing is that it is removed from the BD zone.

Has he been withdrawn? No word on that. He's moved away, yes, but his air force's range is much greater than the 250-300 km he was previously within.

[isv000]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: isv000

The main thing is that it is removed from the BD zone.

Has he been withdrawn? No word on that. He's moved away, yes, but his air force's range is much greater than the 250-300 km he was previously within.

At least he doesn't take part in the BD.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: isv000

At least he doesn't take part in the BD.

So I'm asking, where did you get the information that he doesn't take part in the BD?

[RR_Vernadsky]

Indeed, I also did not find anything in the access

[topol717]

It all depends on the aircraft; most likely, there are F-18s there. And those have a combat radius of 700 km. So if it's 400 km from the coast, it definitely won't reach very far.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote from: topol717

. and there the combat radius is 700 km.

It's a pity the Americans didn't know about this and practiced a head-on battle with our heavy aircraft carriers, carrying out strikes with carrier-based aircraft at a distance of 1600-1700 km.
Furthermore, if the air force has retreated 100 km and is 350-400 km from the coastline, it is somehow strange to think that the Iranians are outside the combat radius of even 700 km.

[topol717]

Fighting a ship, or even a squadron of ships, is not the same as attacking a country with an area of ​​1.5 million square kilometers. Flying at high speed will dramatically reduce the combat radius. And to penetrate air defenses, you need to fly fast.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote from: topol717

Fighting a ship or even a squadron of ships is not the same as attacking a country with an area of ​​1.5 million square kilometers.

This has nothing to do with combat radius. What does matter is the flight profile, speed, payload, and so on.

Quote from: topol717

Then, flying at high speed will dramatically reduce the combat radius. And to break through air defenses, you need to fly fast.

Who told you such nonsense? :))) No need.

[TermNachTer]

It may not be fast, but when flying at extremely low altitudes, fuel consumption is also quite high, so you won't be able to fly for very long.

[TermNachTer]

And which US carrier-based aircraft has (had) a combat radius of 1300 km?

[smart fellow]

The Americans have deployed dozens of KC-135 Stratotanker and KC-46A Pegasus tankers to the region. The aircraft carriers also carry F/A-18E/F Super Hornet multirole fighters configured with external fuel tanks and refueling units (buddy tanking).
Previously, they could still land at airfields in the Persian Gulf countries on the way back and refuel before the Iranians damaged the runways there.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Probably none. But they're still capable of delivering blows over a 1600-kilometer range. A miracle, right? After all, if a Kamaz truck can travel 1000 kilometers on a single tank of gas, then a trip from Chelyabinsk to Moscow would be impossible, right? :)))

[TermNachTer]

Yeah, this reminds me of Goblin from "Storm in a Teacup":
"A robot of the Pinocchio class cannot dive."
"He can't, but he dives."))))

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: TermNachTER

Yeah, that reminds me of Goblin.

Who would have doubted.

[Sokolov_Vladimir]

A-6 "Intruder"

[TermNachTer]

What is the combat radius of the Intruder?

[Sokolov_Vladimir]

With an atomic bomb, the A-6 has 1432 km, but the F-4 Phantom has 1120 km.

[TermNachTer]

We're actually in favor of a strike on a Soviet carrier-carrying group, not a nuclear war. With a normal load, the anti-ship variant has a range of 700 km.

[stankow]

Can carrier-based aircraft attack a heavy aircraft carrier at a range of 1,500 km? Hmm, with reload time? And with what effectiveness?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

How effective is US air power? Usually close to 100%. The patriotic comrades are forced to come up with new explanations every time... And after Vietnam and Korea, the US has demonstrated its class. In fact, they demonstrated it in Korea and Vietnam, too, although not immediately.

[smart fellow]

250-300 km, which he was on before

It was stationed 700-800 km from the Iranian coast. Iranian anti-ship missiles have a range of 150 km, and the Chinese could have deployed more modern anti-ship missiles with a range of 300 km. Let's not forget about Iran's dozens of small submarines; the Americans only hit surface ships, and they're silent about the submarines, even though they tried to destroy them during the attack on the Iranian naval base. The farther from the coast, the more room the strike group has to maneuver, and the more difficult it is for submarines to ambush a strike group moving at speeds of up to 30 knots.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: smart fellow

It remained at a distance of 700-800 km from the coast of Iran.

But the Iranians who attacked it believe it was 300 km. Who do we believe? If you believe them, it means the Iranians attacked the air, but if the Iranians...

[smart fellow]

The media previously reported that the strike group was stationed 700-800 km from the Iranian coast. The same thing happened during the previous campaign. But I can't find any information about a cruise missile strike anywhere. Everywhere they talk about four ballistic missiles. And everyone (primarily Trump, of course) is making these claims on behalf of the Iranians. The article doesn't cite a source.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

I agree, we'll have to look for where he was.

[stankow]

What's the range of these missiles? And how many targets will the AUG be able to reach from the new position? Less, of course.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Let's try to figure out where the old position was and where the new one is. Maybe Av really did leave. These articles may be unreliable.

[Poruchik77]

Without the PTB, it's not much more. They need to fly there and back with a load.

[ARIONkrsk]

Quote: isv000

Quote: Murmur 55

Well, if the ship was seriously damaged, it would have gone to the nearest suitable port or base for repairs. The fact that the aircraft carrier rolled away indicates that the missiles can reach it.

The main thing is that it has been removed from the combat zone and, for now, poses no threat to Iran. And that's a result, no matter how you look at it.

Of course it would be better if it was damaged.

[isv000]

Quote from ARIONkrsk

The main thing is that it has been removed from the combat zone and, for now, poses no threat to Iran. And that's a result, no matter how you look at it.
Of course it would be better if it was damaged.

This is what everyone here dreams of, except for the planted Cossacks.

[Fisherman]

1) The strike was confirmed by both sides
2) Showing the results of hits is unfavorable for both sides. The Persians shouldn't yell "we hit it" to avoid provoking Trump into an unnecessary nuclear strike (and he MUST respond). Showing the Yankees that their AUGs are completely unprotected cans is also uncomfortably bad, and a nuclear strike isn't in their interests right now either.
3) But the Yankees could have provided a ton of results of their missed shots...like a video of the ship's captain from the deck with planes taking off, saying "Hello, Persians!"...but "for some reason" they didn't. So they have something to hide.
4) Damage to the deck or superstructure is not critical to buoyancy... and does not require immediate dry-docking... and under the protection of an escort, even if you stay away from cameras for six months and fill in the dents, it's not a problem.
Most likely, they covered the cluster munitions with the help of Chinese targeting and Baidu...now the Persians have chosen the right tactic of hitting the runways so that the enemy has nowhere to land; the distances are huge and damaging the runways in the surrounding area is much more effective than shooting down individual planes.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Fisherman

The Persians don't need to yell "we're screwed" so as not to provoke Trump into an unnecessary nuclear strike (and he MUST respond that way).

????! Why would they? Expecting such a thing from the American president is as strange as expecting Putin to launch a nuclear strike in response to the invasion of Kursk Oblast.
Nuclear weapons are the last resort of kings; they don’t waste their time on such trifles.

Quote: Fisherman

Showing the Yankees that their AUGs are tin cans with no protection whatsoever is also not comme il faut.

Only a certain segment of our public would consider a missile hit on an aircraft carrier to be evidence that the carrier strike groups are unprotected tin cans. And the US couldn't care less about this public.
Overall, yes, it's not advantageous for the Americans to show damage to their warships. But if they're hit by a missile, they'll say so, although maybe not right away.

Quote: Fisherman

The Yankees could have provided a ton of results of their missed shots, like a video of the ship's captain on the deck with planes taking off, saying "Hello, Persians!"... but "for some reason" they didn't. So they have something to hide.

They reported no hits. The Persians, by the way, aren't insisting there were any. Who needs to prove anything here? :)

Quote: Fisherman

4) Damage to the deck or superstructure is not critical to buoyancy... and does not require immediate dry-docking... and under the protection of an escort, even if you stay away from cameras for six months and fill in the dents, it's not a problem.

You've slightly confused a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier with a galleon, and a cast-iron muzzle-loading 32-pounder with a ballistic missile. In the good old days of sailing, you could anchor on an island and repair your ship safely, fortunately there were plenty of carpenters.
An aircraft carrier that has suffered a missile strike won't be able to patch it up or hide it. The dents left by ballistic missiles are... very serious.

Quote: Fisherman

Most likely they covered it with cassettes

5.25-inch floppy disks. Like in the fairy tale: "Once upon a time, when floppy disks were big and monitors were small..."
Firstly, no one in their right mind would fire cluster munitions at ships. Secondly, if they had fired cluster munitions, they would have shredded so many planes on the deck, and so many people on it and in the open superstructures, that keeping it quiet would have been impossible.
And perhaps it happened like this. The Chinese leaked satellite reconnaissance data to the Iranians, and the Iranians launched ballistic missiles somewhere in that direction, because giving another country the targeting information for a missile strike is practically impossible, and hitting the target with ballistic missiles without a homing head is even more so. Nevertheless, the missiles hit within a hundred kilometers, which was naturally noticed by escort ships or the aircraft carrier itself. So, they retreated, just to be on the safe side.

[stankow]

Yes, without target designation, it's impossible to even fire at an aircraft carrier, let alone hit it. Beidou has nothing to do with it. All satellite navigation systems around the carrier strike group are completely jammed—Chinese, Russian, and European. And there was a report about an *optical* homing unit for Iranian missiles at the end of their flight path. With Chinese electronics, it's not that difficult.

[fruc]

It is not reported whether any serious damage was caused to the aircraft carrier.

The missiles were launched, but there were no results. Were they shot down, missed, or were they just dummies? It's unclear. Or maybe something fell from the sky onto the deck, but the Americans are keeping quiet.

[Murmur 55]

ffruc Well, the fact that the aircraft carrier moved away is an indicator; if there had been no threat there, it would have remained where it was at the time of the attack.

[Sydor Kovpak]

Iran didn't want to sink this floating toilet near its shores.....


Tourists will never go into the water.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Whether there's a result or not, we'll find out a little later. The missiles could have hit the escort ships, if they weren't too smart, or they could have been shot down. If any of the American ships are down for repairs soon, we'll see.

[topol717]

Quote: frruc

The missiles were launched, no results. Shot down, missed, empty shells?

Even if a couple of missiles hit an aircraft carrier, it's like a drop in the bucket. Sure, there might be some minor damage, but most likely nothing serious. Let me remind you that an aircraft carrier's freeboard is 35 meters or more. Plus, it's covered by a ton of ships, so the chances of hitting it directly aren't that great, let alone disabling it.

[Demon]

Well, how can I say that on one of the aircraft carriers, even without the threat of an incoming attack, all the toilets are clogged and require yet another expensive repair, which is impossible to carry out in open water.

[topol717]

Quote: Demon

On one of the aircraft carriers, even without the threat of an incoming attack, all the toilets became clogged and required further expensive repairs, which are impossible to carry out in open water.

If they had to fight urgently, the command couldn't care less how much feces they had there, whether it was knee-deep or waist-deep. Sure, you can and should have a laugh, but don't think it could somehow affect US combat readiness. Besides, where's the guarantee that this isn't a fake from US negotiators? They were lulling people into a false sense of security.

[Demon]

Command doesn't care anyway; it's easier for those at the top to do it. Only those who've shit themselves don't care; they're not slaves chained to a galley. How long and how well can you perform your duties while stuck in a filthy toilet?

[Andriuha077]

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning denied reports of Chinese SM-302 anti-ship missiles being supplied to Iran.

china3army

These supersonic missiles have a firing range of up to 290 km with the ability to bypass enemy naval defense systems.

Cruise missiles

- Soumar (2015, named after a city in western Iran). Range up to 2,000 km, warhead weighing approximately 400 kg. Presumably developed on the basis of the Soviet Kh-55 missile.

- Hoveizeh (2019, named after a city in southwestern Iran). A modernized version of the Soumar. Range: 1,350 km.

- Paveh (2023, named after a city in western Iran). Range of 1,650 km, increased maneuverability. A stated feature is support for a "swarm" mode, in which missiles exchange data to bypass air defense zones.

- Ghadir (2014, in honor of the place where, according to Shiite Muslim beliefs, the Prophet Muhammad declared Ali ibn Abu Talib his successor in 632). Anti-ship missile with a range of about 300 km.

- Abu Mahdi (in honor of the deputy head of the Iraqi Shiite militia Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who died in 2020 along with Soleimani). Anti-ship a missile with a range of about 1,000 km.

- Ya Ali (2014, a Shiite chant commemorating Ali ibn Abu Talib). An air-to-surface missile. Range 700 km, warhead weighing approximately 150 kg.

[TermNachTer]

We need to look at what China does, not what it says. It always says it correctly and beautifully. There are suspicions that the Chinese have hooked the Persians into their "Yaogang" system.

[isv000]

Quote: Andriuha077

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning denied reports of Chinese SM-302 anti-ship missiles being supplied to Iran.

The Chinese will sit by the river until they see their corpse floating by...

[ALEXX.]

The Kurds are like a time bomb.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The Kurds won't fight for the US anymore. The Americans sold them out completely in Syria. Which means they'll sell them out in Iran too. There are no fools there. And the Kurds themselves have dwindled in numbers after the events in Syria, especially in recent months.

[isv000]

Iran claims to have "driven away" the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln with cruise missiles.

Both sides maintain their own "buts"! The fact remains: "Abrasha" has departed and hasn't promised to return. The Toadeaters are dragging "De Gaulle," while the Houthis are rubbing their hands in anticipation...

[TermNachTer]

I highly doubt the Abram was so close to the shore; it's dangerous. Most likely, it was about 500 km away. The Hornets and Penguins were operating from the drop tanks.

[yuriy55]

However, there is growing evidence that the Navy command, following the report of the aircraft carrier group commander, gave the order to move the aircraft carrier away - precisely after the Iranian attack...

...It was there that the Iranian submarine's Tsirkons overtook him...

[Konnick]

A spokesman for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said a US Navy carrier battle group was attacked by four cruise missiles while it was within 300 km of Iran's coast.

They would decide whether they would be winged or ballistic.

The Iranian television channel IRIB, citing reports from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has published a statement that Iran attacked the American aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln.

The attack was allegedly carried out by four ballistic missiles. According to the latest reports, the aircraft carrier was in the Arabian Sea at the time of the attack.

[1944-1989]

Anyone who criticizes Iran for its misguided decisions may be missing the point. I believe the Iranian leadership wasn't afraid of death, and its successors and the entire plan of action had already been developed. Now, if Iran repels the aggression, it will already be a great victory and a step forward.

[know]

I think the Iranian leadership was not afraid of death.

Khomeini himself might not have been afraid of death, but what did he think about his responsibility for the country? Like, I'll go to heaven, and let them sort out the legacy I left them?
However, some are now writing that Khomeini was "the Iranian Gorbachev" and was attempting to reach an agreement with the West. His coordinates, as well as those of the meeting of 40 of his high-ranking military and IRGC officials, were leaked by more radical Islamists who are determined to wage a tough confrontation. Of course, this cannot be said with certainty right now. After the war ends, something may become clear, but even then, it may take a while, depending on who remains in power in Iran.

[1944-1989]

In any case, the right people have seized power and will destroy the defensive and offensive capabilities of the Zionist state, while in the US there is growing awareness of the problem and rebellion even among MAGA supporters like Zubro.

[TermNachTer]

The successors were appointed in advance, and judging by the actions of the Persians, no problems were observed in the vertical chain of command.

[Ture-Dog]

The words "I affirm that" and the quotation marks around the word "drive away" are unnecessary. The demonic ship clearly didn't just disappear without a reason.

[AdAstra]

Everything is correct - "And you affirm."

[faterdom]

Where is the southeastern Indian Ocean? Java, Sumatra, Australia? Is it easier to pressure Iran from there?

[tlauicol]

Are the Kurds political prostitutes or something? Just a month ago, the Americans threw them under the knife in Syria!
The aircraft carrier will return. It still needs to take on heat and ammunition. Meanwhile, the shore will be cleared.

[Dmitry Rigov]

These are the Iraqi Kurds (KDP), and they've screwed the Syrian Kurds (PKK). The Kurdistan Workers' Party is extremist in Iraqi Kurdistan, but things are much more complicated there; the Kurds are not united.

[tlauicol]

Quote: Dmitry Rigov

These are the Iraqi Kurds (KDP), and they've screwed the Syrian Kurds (PKK). The Kurdistan Workers' Party is extremist in Iraqi Kurdistan, but things are much more complicated there; the Kurds are not united.

That's what I'm saying: prostitutes. The KDP fought on Iran's side. And now, seeing how the Americans have abandoned other Kurdish prostitutes, will they step into the same filth?

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Tlauicol

Are the Kurds political prostitutes or something? Just a month ago, the Americans threw them under the knife in Syria!

The Kurds of Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey are all very different. And each diaspora has its own leaders. So, when some are killed, others don't care.

[sgrabik]

It would have been better if the Iranians had not driven away the aircraft carrier, but had sunk it. That would have been a blow to the US and personally to Trump; it would have quickly cooled his overheated head.

[Konnick]

Quote: sgrabik

It would have been better if the Iranians had not driven away the aircraft carrier, but had sunk it. That would have been a blow to the US and personally to Trump; it would have quickly cooled his overheated head.

Would...Would...Would...

[sgrabik]

I see, but what about the essence of the question???

[Konnick]

Quote: sgrabik

I see, but what about the essence of the question???

Captain obvious

[matsur]

Aircraft carriers don't need just four missiles. It would be more interesting if they had many more.

[Atheist]

It's highly doubtful that the strike group could have been within range of coastal anti-ship missiles—the US Navy command doesn't tolerate fools. Iran may have cruise missiles or UAVs capable of engaging a moving naval target at a range of up to 1000 km—which would be critical for sea-based aviation.

[Poruchik77]

And what about Admiral Trans? ) They fired her/him, I think..?

[Dmitry Rigov]

It's strange that the Iranian submarines are completely silent. They should be the ones posing a threat to the strike group. Obviously, getting close is extremely difficult, but at least one should have been silently awaiting the strike group's arrival in the Arabian Sea.

[Konnick]

Quote: Dmitry Rigov

It's strange that the Iranian submarines are completely silent. They should be the ones posing a threat to the strike group. Obviously, getting close is extremely difficult, but at least one should have been silently awaiting the strike group's arrival in the Arabian Sea.

There the commanders have a normal education, not a theological one, and will not sacrifice the lives of their subordinates for the sake of religious fanatics in power.

[Inevitably]

Yes, and besides, there were successful strikes on the Iranian naval base.

[berlaga2005]

Perhaps there are simpler and more interesting targets for submarines? For example, oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico (or the Gulf of America)? Or American LNG ships heading to Europe? An asymmetrical strike.

[TermNachTer]

The older Varshavyankas don't have much of a chance; the Arabian Sea is quite deep. For a mattress-type submarine escorting a strike group, the conditions are ideal. But for a diesel-electric submarine, which isn't exactly the newest, the situation is less so.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Where and how to get there is a matter of chance. Here, oil tankers are burned to the ground by a few drones, and there, by missiles. There was an incident during the Falklands War, when a British ship burned not even from the explosion of a small French missile launched by the Argentines, but from a fire caused by its cruise engine.

[Poruchik77]

The debut of the French exocet was then successful

[Barbian]

New wording: Not destroyed or damaged... Driven away...
An aircraft carrier in an escort role can only be destroyed by tactical nuclear weapons.
There are no other options. The mighty USSR knew this rule, and for this reason it created operational groups within its fleets and special forces.
Iran is clearly disorganized in the wake of the destruction of its command staff, and its response is chaotic and unproductive.

[flicker]

It is not reported whether any serious damage was caused to the aircraft carrier.

Probably not.
Because Iran doesn’t need this right now, within the framework of the controlled escalation strategy it is using (they are not even using the Houthis’ capabilities yet).
Iran, by striking the aircraft carrier, was pursuing the goal of driving the latter away from the coast of Iran.
Which is what I achieved.
If necessary, they will disable it.

[Barbian]

The Houthis live in the Middle Ages and make homemade drones and rockets in caves.
That's all they have to offer. I wouldn't rely on the Khusts if I were in Iran's shoes.

[snow mountain]

Iran claims to have "driven away" the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln with cruise missiles.

It would have been better if they had drowned him! But that wouldn't be bad either.

[AK-1945]

Iran claims to have "driven away" the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln with cruise missiles.

It's a shame they didn't sink it. Although maybe it's not time yet.