Posted on Aug 6, 2019
Could Iran's Mines 'Sink' the U.S. Navy in a War?
345
6
3
3
3
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
First we need to define “mines”. The Iranian ones used on the tankers are “limpet” mines not ocean or harbor mines. So, the mines just used assume somebody can get close to a warship—-not. The other types are much different.
The ‘real” mines are used to “deny use” and are not active weapons systems. To “sink the US Navy in a War”, the mines would have to be in areas of open ocean and guess where carriers operate. The best bet for mines is in expected transit, harbor and littoral operating areas. Even then most major transit areas are quite deep and the mine would have to survive a very hostile crush depth. In addition, task forces do not sail in close formations. As a norm, ships are miles apart unless conducting underway replenishment or formation practice.
One had best not expect to see them lay the mines as today’s mines can be mobile and swim to a location and wait for extended periods. Underwater listening devices might catch the propulsion noise, but that would be difficult considering the high level of ambient noise in the Hormuz area. The mines can be programmed to detect a specific ship and not activate or rise just because a ship rides over it. They can even ignore signatures of a target ship until the time is right—-start of hostilities. In addition dummy mines are often in an inventory.
Even with today’s sophisticated detection systems, it is almost a necessity that previous scans of the bottom have been taken and updated as there is a lot of trash (which moves around and added to) in transit lanes.
That said—Iran’s ship mines would be “best” used on commercial vessels...known routes, slow moving, exceptionally vulnerable. Shut down traffic and thoroughly pollute their own coastal areas.
The ‘real” mines are used to “deny use” and are not active weapons systems. To “sink the US Navy in a War”, the mines would have to be in areas of open ocean and guess where carriers operate. The best bet for mines is in expected transit, harbor and littoral operating areas. Even then most major transit areas are quite deep and the mine would have to survive a very hostile crush depth. In addition, task forces do not sail in close formations. As a norm, ships are miles apart unless conducting underway replenishment or formation practice.
One had best not expect to see them lay the mines as today’s mines can be mobile and swim to a location and wait for extended periods. Underwater listening devices might catch the propulsion noise, but that would be difficult considering the high level of ambient noise in the Hormuz area. The mines can be programmed to detect a specific ship and not activate or rise just because a ship rides over it. They can even ignore signatures of a target ship until the time is right—-start of hostilities. In addition dummy mines are often in an inventory.
Even with today’s sophisticated detection systems, it is almost a necessity that previous scans of the bottom have been taken and updated as there is a lot of trash (which moves around and added to) in transit lanes.
That said—Iran’s ship mines would be “best” used on commercial vessels...known routes, slow moving, exceptionally vulnerable. Shut down traffic and thoroughly pollute their own coastal areas.
(1)
(0)
We will be fine, our Mine Warfare systems continue to improve with UUVs, the new SH-60 mine warfare variant, LCS MW MM etc... But, the key to our approach in the gulf is our allies the Brits and Aussies who bring a lot of capability to the table. Plus we are not going to stand by and watch them lay mines.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next