PDA

View Full Version : Iran's new super-secret top weapon, revealed:



bigross86
28 Feb 13,, 19:45
Remember folks, you saw it here, first!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCGeeDstAGg

Red Team
28 Feb 13,, 22:14
Reminds me of a rejected unit type from Command and Conquer. :biggrin:

Chogy
01 Mar 13,, 14:19
Oddly enough, I cannot think of any reason a manned, air-breathing jet could not be launched from a submarine. Zero practicality to it, of course.

Modify a naval fighter with folding wings; encapsulate. The rocket motor would need to be capable of boosting the jet to at least 1000 meters, because the jet would need to be able to start engine(s) during a glide.

Pilot hops in, starts the APU or JFS, and signals go. As soon as the capsule releases him, he'd be busy getting his engines going. And of course, recovery is going to be chalenging! ;)

dave lukins
01 Mar 13,, 16:09
Pilot hops in, starts the APU or JFS, and signals go.

Changing gear with flippers on is proving a problem :biggrin: Plus the XO refuses to get wet

Dreadnought
01 Mar 13,, 17:47
Is someone going to lend them an F-15 and the sub to launch it?:biggrin:

USSWisconsin
01 Mar 13,, 19:19
Oh NO! Now we're in trouble - but why aren't they using their new stealth fighter? I suppose the FSBM-15 has more room for the nukes, probably the advanced MIRV'ed ballisitic missiles, capable of hitting Washington DC - watch out Obama - Dinnerjackket is coming for that shotgun you have - and he's going to melt it down with a nuclear fireball. 1000 Megatons and he'll use 20 of them, all on one missle - the new IKM - 3000. Oop's, the mod's may need to delete this post, since it has compromised Iranian OPPSEC... :whome:

Deltacamelately
04 Mar 13,, 06:15
Ben,

Get into that NBC proof truck of your's and run the hell out of Israel, possibly into Syria before DinnerJacket finds you.

Dante
04 Mar 13,, 11:56
Wasn't there a WW2 Japanese design for a submarine- carrier? Or was it a carrier that could submerge? :confused:
Maybe these guys are on to something and everyone else is not thinking outside the box? It sounds very useful for..a..something..:confu:

Tanker
04 Mar 13,, 12:37
Why can't we have some whiny Iran supporters in this forum? Jussaskin' :D

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 12:39
It sounds very useful for..a..something..

It could be good for a one-way tactical suicide attack with munitions. Think about it, you park a sub off the Delaware coast, 100 miles away from Washington DC. The FSBM-15 carries JDAM's or even tactical 50kt nukes. F-15 goes at 1,000MPH, it arrives over the White House in 6 minutes, and can probably drop munitions even before that, depending on GPS. Within 5 minutes, you could take out the capital, the White House and the Pentagon, and then Kamikaze your ass into the Washington Monument, just for the hell of it.

Unless there is a permanent CAP over Washington DC, even the alert 5 fighters from Andrews will be hard pressed to catch the intruder in time

Dante
04 Mar 13,, 15:12
It could be good for a one-way tactical suicide attack with munitions. Think about it, you park a sub off the Delaware coast, 100 miles away from Washington DC. The FSBM-15 carries JDAM's or even tactical 50kt nukes. F-15 goes at 1,000MPH, it arrives over the White House in 6 minutes, and can probably drop munitions even before that, depending on GPS. Within 5 minutes, you could take out the capital, the White House and the Pentagon, and then Kamikaze your ass into the Washington Monument, just for the hell of it.

Unless there is a permanent CAP over Washington DC, even the alert 5 fighters from Andrews will be hard pressed to catch the intruder in time

well yes, but I don't see why you wouldn't do that with a regular sub & cruise missiles. What do you need the planes for?
-(I think we're getting to serious)-

Edit: found it, Iran's muse :cool:32201

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 15:17
To add the human element. If defenses do come up, cruise missiles can't jink to avoid them, or turn around to attack again, if something goes wrong and the pilot has the chance

Doktor
04 Mar 13,, 16:10
Ben,

Get into that NBC proof truck of your's and run the hell out of Israel, possibly into Syria before DinnerJacket finds you.

Maj,

You are not fully updated I see.

Ben is in Iran and Syria and Israel at the same time.

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 16:17
I dunno what rubbish Dok is talking about, I'm in Tel Aviv at the university.....

Doktor
04 Mar 13,, 16:23
True,

No new reports on Iranian scientists killed ;)

YellowFever
04 Mar 13,, 16:35
Wait, did anybody ever see Benny and Dinnerjacket in the same room at the same time?

I don't think so.

Hmm.....

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 16:37
Please, on my worst days I look a hell of a let better than Dinnerjacket could ever look, even on his best days

YellowFever
04 Mar 13,, 16:43
Both also have that massive sense of denial....

Hmmm.....

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 16:45
And both of us will bitch slap you into oblivion if we ever get our hands on you

YellowFever
04 Mar 13,, 17:09
Now, now, Benjamin, be nice.

It's not everyday a college kid who can't pull a chick gets compared to an evil puppet dictator with sub launched Eagles at their disposal.

You should be honored!

tankie
04 Mar 13,, 17:54
:pop::pop::pop:

Doktor
04 Mar 13,, 17:54
Hmmm.... :pop:

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 18:17
First of all, that's University, not college. Second of all, don't you think it's time you got some new jokes? Honestly, Just because your "wife" barely gives you the time of day doesn't mean that the rest of us here are losers with women. Hell, I'll bet that even Tarek has more success with the wimmenfolk than you do at the moment....

tankie
04 Mar 13,, 18:26
30 all

YellowFever
04 Mar 13,, 20:42
First of all, that's University, not college. Second of all, don't you think it's time you got some new jokes? Honestly, Just because your "wife" barely gives you the time of day doesn't mean that the rest of us here are losers with women. Hell, I'll bet that even Tarek has more success with the wimmenfolk than you do at the moment....


Heh, sorry for picking on you, Benny.

Just wanted to test that old theory about Pavlov's dog...

Mention Celine, and the Colonel comes a knocking.....

Mention sheep, and Pari says something unintelligible...

You and I tussle and tankie and DoK posts emoticons...

Yep, the WAB is just where I left it....

I love you guys!

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 21:47
Good on ya, mate! Hell of a way to bow out of a duel you know you're not gonna win :biggrin:

YellowFever
04 Mar 13,, 21:53
Meh, you can only club baby seals so many times before you get bored.

I was bored. :(

Edit: oh shit, Pari is looking at this thread. Let me go get my thesaurus...

bigross86
04 Mar 13,, 22:26
Meh, you can only club baby seals so many times before you get bored.

Yeah, you are right about that. And I'll bet it still hurts from the last time you had all those clubs knocked upside your head, huh?

YellowFever
05 Mar 13,, 00:05
Nevermind dude....

I thought for sure Pari was going to say something to insult me or us but he just left without so much as a look.

I'm being gloriously ignore...

I'm so depressed. :frown:

bigross86
05 Mar 13,, 09:31
Or as you like to call it, a regular Monday evening....

Bigfella
05 Mar 13,, 11:06
Wasn't there a WW2 Japanese design for a submarine- carrier? Or was it a carrier that could submerge? :confused:
Maybe these guys are on to something and everyone else is not thinking outside the box? It sounds very useful for..a..something..:confu:

Actually rather a lot of designs for submarine carriers. The Japanese used them most extensively, though usually for recon. One example had a small plane on board in kit form. It was assembled at night when the sub surfaced (there were numbers in luminous paint on the joints), flown for recon missions & then I think landed on or nesr the sub where it was taken down again for later use. One of these planes made at least one flight over parts of Melbourne & then on another flight it went over Auckland in NZ.

The big carrier subs were remarkable things for the time. If japan had been less obsessed wiht flying useless planes off them & more interested in their potential just as subs they might have actually had some use.

Classic 'truth is stranger than fiction' stuff.

Submarine aircraft carrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_aircraft_carrier)

Captain Worley
05 Mar 13,, 14:22
The big carrier subs were remarkable things for the time. If japan had been less obsessed wiht flying useless planes off them & more interested in their potential just as subs they might have actually had some use.


If they had used them to launch license built V-1s, it would have been interesting.

Doktor
05 Mar 13,, 14:53
If they had used them to launch license built V-1s, it would have been interesting.

Subs with missiles? So Americans were 'naive' for waiting another ~10 years?

Aryajet
18 Apr 13,, 18:42
Why can't we have some whiny Iran supporters in this forum? Jussaskin' :D

Iranian regime supporters you mean. Whiny or other wise.

Stitch
18 Apr 13,, 23:51
If they had used them to launch license built V-1s, it would have been interesting.

Or maybe some Ohka's; they already have a relatively small wingspan, which means it would probably fit in the hanger on an I-400-class submarine.

32755

USSWisconsin
19 Apr 13,, 01:36
Or maybe some Ohka's; they already have a relatively small wingspan, which means it would probably fit in the hanger on an I-400-class submarine.

32755
I recall seeing photos of one of these taken apart, it had a tubular main spar, - so the wings could probably have been removed to stow it on one of those subs.

Admiral Nelson
19 Apr 13,, 01:44
C'mon guys, everyone knows that this was in operation back in 1980....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Wos5e_WlYs

Aryajet
24 Apr 13,, 18:06
Here is a Utube clip about Japanese I-400 class secret Submarine aircraft carrier, and its destiny after WW2.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5-ijBs8iJA

Captain Worley
25 Apr 13,, 13:21
Or maybe some Ohka's; they already have a relatively small wingspan, which means it would probably fit in the hanger on an I-400-class submarine.

32755

Yeah, that, too. Would have been more damaging because the 'guidance system' was better.

I went with the V-1s because they were operational earlier.