Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I'd guess they may consider them - the few that fly - as some sort of "look at what we have" garbage. Just speculation - a suicide hi-speed, Straits of Hormuz mission type of thing - send 'em out and launch whatever mish-mosh of missiles they have. In the Iran-Iraq war, they used them as ersatz AWACS. Supposedly, they've managed to retrofit I-Hawk SAMs (yes, SAMs) to them, but I have serious problems believing that report, for obvious reasons. The Su-25's? Those old buggies have tactical use, but against who? I'd guess that their main use is attacking their own citizenry, ala the Serb's use of Galoob (?) and Alpha to whack their own. Just because they're buying them, doesn't mean they have a specific mission in mind. Not everyone procures like the US did with the A-10, with a very specific combat situation envisioned. Hell, the US doesn't even do that anymore...look at the friggin' Raptor program. But anyway...with PGMs, they apparently have a creditable naval strike capability. The Russians designed a variant of the SU-25 for their carrier, at least... I'd be worried if they got their claws onto some Mirage F-1's... 607780[/snapback] They have them, both purchased outright and ex-Iraqi planes flown to Iran during Desert Storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 we're talking people that strap nail bombs to their bodies. Just what parameters do they need if they think they drop a nuke on americans? hell if they can duct tape the thing to the fuselage then it's "weee off we go" 607798[/snapback] An SU-25 is NOT going to reach America. It's not even going to reach Tel Aviv. They're short-range low-altitude heavily armored aircraft. And yes, releasing a weapon successfully requires a plane fly within a given set of parameters defined for that weapon. It's not just "drop and pray", even with nukes. Even with suicide missions. The real world, in fact, is more complex than portrayed in "24". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 They have them, both purchased outright and ex-Iraqi planes flown to Iran during Desert Storm. 607893[/snapback] Yeah, but what good are two going to do them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 An SU-25 is NOT going to reach America. It's not even going to reach Tel Aviv. They're short-range low-altitude heavily armored aircraft. It's a relief to know that there no americans in range of a stripped down one way SU-25 armed with a nuke. Hell, turn it into a sea skimmer and take off after the navy, why should the Marines have all the fun? If you doubt the ingenuity of the enemies that hate America take a look at the gaping hole where the twin towers used to be. It IS a relief to know that we're going to turn over port security in the USA to a company that comes from the UAE. We have more to worry about a LNG tanker going up in a major port than the Iranian "Strategic" air force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 In the Iran-Iraq war, they used them as ersatz AWACS. Supposedly, they've managed to retrofit I-Hawk SAMs (yes, SAMs) to them, but I have serious problems believing that report, for obvious reasons.Just because they're buying them, doesn't mean they have a specific mission in mind. Not everyone procures like the US did with the A-10, with a very specific combat situation envisioned. Hell, the US doesn't even do that anymore...look at the friggin' Raptor program. But anyway...with PGMs, they apparently have a creditable naval strike capability. The Russians designed a variant of the SU-25 for their carrier, at least... They have them, both purchased outright and ex-Iraqi planes flown to Iran during Desert Storm. 607893[/snapback] I can concieve fitting old Hawks. Not for original purpose - more to having missiles in inventory, that one could perhaps rivet on a cheap radio beam-rider sensor working the control surfaces for A-G purpose. Or just stick in a contact fuse and drop them as dumb bombs. Better than tossing them into the ditch. I didn't know they had some F-1's. With good piloting and if they are the of fighter flavor, that's a capability to note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Yeah, but what good are two going to do them? 607903[/snapback] they got one boy plane and one girl plane, silly. Hasn't anyone ever explained this to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Yeah, but what good are two going to do them? 607903[/snapback] More like fifty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 It's a relief to know that there no americans in range of a stripped down one way SU-25 armed with a nuke. Hell, turn it into a sea skimmer and take off after the navy, why should the Marines have all the fun? About as threatening as the Chinese antisattelite laser at the South Pole. They'd do better loading a nuke into a Cessna. A 757 makes a better strategic asset than a SU-25. Hell, a Tu22M3 makes a better strategic asset than any of them - faster, longer range, can actually deliver nuclear weapons - and the Iranians have a handful of those. But let's all whine and B word and panic and cry and moan about a plane none of you ever heard of until this thread, that the Iranians ALREADY had about fifty copies of before they bought these three, that can't even reach most regional strategic targets, and that none of you know anything about anyway. If you doubt the ingenuity of the enemies that hate America take a look at the gaping hole where the twin towers used to be. As I said, a 757 makes a better strategic asset than a SU-25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I can concieve fitting old Hawks. Not for original purpose - more to having missiles in inventory, that one could perhaps rivet on a cheap radio beam-rider sensor working the control surfaces for A-G purpose. Or just stick in a contact fuse and drop them as dumb bombs. Better than tossing them into the ditch. I didn't know they had some F-1's. With good piloting and if they are the of fighter flavor, that's a capability to note. 607932[/snapback] Why the hell would anyone turn a surface-to-air missile like the Hawk into an air-to-surface missile? You going to take out Chinese anti-satellite Antarctic lasers with it? My understanding is they got the damned things to launch from the F-14s in an air-to-air capacity...which, if they did, is a pretty impressive piece of engineering, given that they'd probably have to reengineer the Tomcat's radar as well as the Hawk's seeker and control mechanisms. But like I said...I have a hard time believing it. Even if Iran has a surprisingly competent aircraft industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 More like fifty. 608033[/snapback] Oh, I thought you said that they have them both, meaning two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Why the hell would anyone turn a surface-to-air missile like the Hawk into an air-to-surface missile? You going to take out Chinese anti-satellite Antarctic lasers with it? My understanding is they got the damned things to launch from the F-14s in an air-to-air capacity...which, if they did, is a pretty impressive piece of engineering, given that they'd probably have to reengineer the Tomcat's radar as well as the Hawk's seeker and control mechanisms. But like I said...I have a hard time believing it. Even if Iran has a surprisingly competent aircraft industry. 608047[/snapback] I share your wtf's. Look at it this way. I have a bunch of ancient, iffy Hawks. Can I use them some way? Not against a technological power, one supposes, but against a bunch of folks with trucks and infantry and old armor. Sticking a radio receptor to make it's fins move is simple stuff, like rc hobby aircraft. 'Tis a poor armoror that can't adapt to what he has. And one could easily - in the field - figure out a way to drop them as dumb bombs. Again - why toss warheads into the trash heap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I share your wtf's. Look at it this way. I have a bunch of ancient, iffy Hawks. Can I use them some way? Not against a technological power, one supposes, but against a bunch of folks with trucks and infantry and old armor. Sticking a radio receptor to make it's fins move is simple stuff, like rc hobby aircraft. 'Tis a poor armoror that can't adapt to what he has. And one could easily - in the field - figure out a way to drop them as dumb bombs. Again - why toss warheads into the trash heap? 608175[/snapback] Warheads are cheap. Radar guidance packages hardened against EM and solid rocket propellant are expensive. For the price of a single Hawk - new, I'll admit - and it's 60kg warhead, you could purchase roughly a thousand 500-lb bombs. So trade them to the Chinese for 500-lb bombs. Still a better use than trying to destroy anything with a 60kg fragmentation warhead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 dib - the Su-25 is a tactical ground-attack platform. There is no lack of commercial aircraft that could hold a nuclear device - hidden in a cargo hold, on a suicide mission. An old cargo ship with legit shipping papers with an ancient surface-to-surface missile brought up from it's hold, prepped and armed, works. Or just steam into port and push the button. The general idea is to do what one can to stop the warhead production. If you hit me with a close-range flintlock smooth-bore 50 caliber lead ball at 100 feet or a 50 caliber Browning machine gun bullet at 2000 yards, the result is the same... One nuke set off on our soil pretty much insures WWIII or some variant. Just a guess, but I think that before that happens, as a deterrent, Muslim terrorists and Muslim nations have been informed that the US nuclear response order of battle is the destruction of Mecca, Medina, Cairo, Tehran, Damascus, Jakarta, Beriut, Ridayh, Muscat etc. And a cobalt cladding to insure centuries of inhabitibility of those targets is a trivial task... 'tis Har Meggido...Armaggedon... 607821[/snapback] Why wait to destroy those ass clown, so called cities. Lets start leveling them now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbh10128 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 My Webpage Iran is buying Su-25UBT ground attack aircraft from Russia. Iran has confirmed the fact of purchasing three Su-25 bombers from Russia. Earlier a Russian defense industry source informed that Teheran procured three planes of Su-25UBT series, a combat two-seat aircraft-bomber. As Middle East News Line information agency reports, the contract was signed in 2005 and to be implemented within 2006. Three of them are to be delivered this year. The UBT is the latest model of the Su-25, which is similar to the American A-10. The 17 ton aircraft carries up to 4.4 tons of missiles and bombs. The UBT version is also equipped with electronic countermeasures and a fire control system that can handle the latest Russian air-to-ground missiles and smart bombs. No mention was made of Russia selling those munitions (similar to the American Maverick missile and laser guided bombs). But there’s no point in buying the UBT model, unless you get the modern munitions that version of the Su-25 can handle. The Su-25 can operate over a thousand kilometers from its base, if it uses drop tanks. 606991[/snapback] SO WHAT? MAYBE IF WE'D TRY BETTER COMMUNICATIONS W/ ARAB COUNTRIES INSTEAD OF ISOLATING THEM PER ISRAEL'S WISHES EVERY TIME WE MIGHT ACTUALLY GET SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE EAST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 SO WHAT? MAYBE IF WE'D TRY BETTER COMMUNICATIONS W/ ARAB COUNTRIES INSTEAD OF ISOLATING THEM PER ISRAEL'S WISHES EVERY TIME WE MIGHT ACTUALLY GET SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 608213[/snapback] I dont like communicating with people that protest everyday, burn flags, kill people, burn businesses, kidnap people and lop off their heads just because they dont agree with me. I prefer to nuke the entire country of people like that. I consider it evolution, let the more civilized people succeed. Who needs these crazy nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbh10128 Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I dont like communicating with people that protest everyday, burn flags, kill people, burn businesses, kidnap people and lop off their heads just because they dont agree with me. I prefer to nuke the entire country of people like that. I consider it evolution, let the more civilized people succeed. Who needs these crazy nuts. 608222[/snapback] LOOK AROUND, YOU'LL FIND PLENTY EXAMPLES OF THAT BEHAVIOR IN THE WEST TOO. POINT IS ITS EVERYWHERE, JUST AS LEVEL HEADED PEOPLE ARE EVERYWHERE TOO. AND IT'S THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG US THAT NEED TO CONNECT WITH THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG THEM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 SO WHAT? MAYBE IF WE'D TRY BETTER COMMUNICATIONS W/ ARAB COUNTRIES INSTEAD OF ISOLATING THEM PER ISRAEL'S WISHES EVERY TIME WE MIGHT ACTUALLY GET SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE EAST 608213[/snapback] I'm using the angle of your inane postings as a form of secret code to communicate with the terrorists in my next movie. Thank you for the idea. No, no royalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 AND IT'S THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG US THAT NEED TO CONNECT WITH THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG THEM. 608236[/snapback] Somehow, I doubt a guy that can't even figure out how to turn off the !@#$ing caps-lock qualifies as "level-headed". Just a gut feeling I have... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB27 Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 LOOK AROUND, YOU'LL FIND PLENTY EXAMPLES OF THAT BEHAVIOR IN THE WEST TOO. POINT IS ITS EVERYWHERE, JUST AS LEVEL HEADED PEOPLE ARE EVERYWHERE TOO. AND IT'S THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG US THAT NEED TO CONNECT WITH THE LEVEL-HEADED AMONG THEM. 608236[/snapback] OK Osama. Screw the Iranians. They are a bunch of wacko's that will be next after Iraq. I figure there is a plan on the table that we are going to see sooner than later to take out their nuclear ambitions. I wonder how many french and german products we will find in these nuclear sites when we go? No doubt the russians are helping them too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Warheads are cheap. Radar guidance packages hardened against EM and solid rocket propellant are expensive. For the price of a single Hawk - new, I'll admit - and it's 60kg warhead, you could purchase roughly a thousand 500-lb bombs. So trade them to the Chinese for 500-lb bombs. Still a better use than trying to destroy anything with a 60kg fragmentation warhead. 608183[/snapback] Long live the 500 pounder! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts