Israeli Military Says Missile Struck Warship Instead of Drone

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
BEIRUT, Lebanon — A missile fired by Hezbollah, not an unmanned drone laden with explosives, damaged an Israeli warship off Lebanon, the army said Saturday.

The attack on Friday night had raised widespread concern in the Israeli military because initial information indicated that the guerrillas had used a drone for the first time to attack Israeli forces.

But the army's investigation into the attack, which left four Israeli sailors missing, showed that Hezbollah had fired an Iranian-made missile at the vessel from the shores of Lebanon, said Brig. Gen. Ido Nehushtan.

"We can confirm that it was hit by an Iranian-made missile launched by Hezbollah. We see this as very profound fingerprint of Iranian involvement in Hezbollah," Nehushtan said in an interview with The Associated Press.


-----------------------------------------------------

If this is so, it points probably towards a shore launched C-802 missile, or perhaps a shorter range C-701. Either way it is a huge development, and a huge naval war event...as well as a significant escalation.

Before yesterday, most would have laid odds that a ship with the capability of the Saar 5 would have been able to defend itself against several such missiles, let alone a single one.

This is a huge coup for Hezbollah and Iran and vindicates the Chinese technology. I will also represent a much increased threat against US and its allies vessels in the Gulf since this is exactly the threat envrionment they will face.

It is yet to be seen how this threat will play out against the SAEGIS system, which is more capable than that of the Saar 5 and was also designed precisely to defend against these attacks.

I now understand that two of the bodies of the four IDF sailors have been recovered.

Here's a pic of the Saar 5:

saar13.jpg
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
Yep, all the info I am getting points now towards a PRC made ASM. I have to say I am impressed by the fact that what I thought was the most advanced corvett was put out of action by a single shot that was ABLE to hit the warship. I am sure the is quite a hoot for the PRC and Iranian military forces....cheers ute.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Jeff, after reading the title of this thread before reading it I was going to move it to the Israel in Gaza thread. But after reading this development I think this subject bears it's own merit.

I'm am not surprised that the Chinese technology of this missile actually worked. It did exactly what it was designed to do.

Question is did Hezbollah actually recieve this missile from Iran? My guess is yes. Did Iranians fire the missiles for Hezbollah? That's the big question. Really big...Another question is, as Jeff asked, is how well would this missile faired against the Aegis system? Well I don't know. But if the Ageis system was doing what it was designed to do it would have shot down the missile.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
utelore said:
Yep, all the info I am getting points now towards a PRC made ASM. I have to say I am impressed by the fact that what I thought was the most advanced corvett was put out of action by a single shot that was ABLE to hit the warship. I am sure the is quite a hoot for the PRC and Iranian military forces....cheers ute.
Yes... a very majopr development and one that naval analysts on both sides are pouring over right now...you can bet money on it. I would not be surprised, if things continue to develop and more escalation occurs, to see the AEGIS system tested by this same threat in the Straits or in the Gulf.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
This is quite interesting. I do hope we get more information on this. So, are we sure at this moment that only one missile was fired at SAAR 5? If that's the case, then it would suggest:
1) that SAAR 5 just did not detect the missile at all
2) It detected it but it could not shoot it down
also, on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it says something about "The YJ-62 ASCM outperforms most Western and Russian anti-ship missiles in terms of range and warhead mass, thought it is not clear whether the missile possesses the same accuracy and anti-jamming capability"
this is definitely a good showing for this missile's accuracy and anti-jamming capability
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Yes... a very majopr development and one that naval analysts on both sides are pouring over right now...you can bet money on it. I would not be surprised, if things continue to develop and more escalation occurs, to see the AEGIS system tested by this same threat in the Straits or in the Gulf

You know Jeff and Ute I was thinking the same thing for some time. It is just a matter of time before this thing escalates.

I have to wonder what sort of posture the Israeli ship was in at the moment of the attack? They should have been ready to repel the attack. That ship has the means to do so. If that were a USN ship that was hit like that without detecting the missile the CO would be relieved of duty.

Did you guys know that there is NO USN Carrier Strike Group (CSG) in the Persian Gulf or the Mediterranean Sea at this time? The Enterprise was in the Persian Gulf was sent to the Western Pacific about 10 days ago. I'm expecting a "surge" deployment by an east coast CSG very soon.
 

utelore

Junior Member
VIP Professional
yes dont get me wrong in thinking that if it was a PRC ASM that I did not think it would not work but I am suprised that the warship was not able to defend itself. What else is interesting is the fact that Israel is not showing any pictures of the ship. It must be really messed up to NOT show on the news. I am putting my mony on that Iranian Rev gaurd lanched this attack.
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
tphuang said:
This is quite interesting. I do hope we get more information on this. So, are we sure at this moment that only one missile was fired at SAAR 5? If that's the case, then it would suggest:
1) that SAAR 5 just did not detect the missile at all
2) It detected it but it could not shoot it down
also, on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

it says something about "The YJ-62 ASCM outperforms most Western and Russian anti-ship missiles in terms of range and warhead mass, thought it is not clear whether the missile possesses the same accuracy and anti-jamming capability"
this is definitely a good showing for this missile's accuracy and anti-jamming capability

Friend you posted a mouthful...

1)..If the SAAR did not detect the missile that means the missile as some sort of jamming technology that does work or the Israeli sailors were not performing their duties as trained.

2)..Was the speed of the missle to great for the SAAR to react to it's approach? If so this is a coup for Chinese technology.

Once again my question is..Could the same missile peform as well against the Aegis system????
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
tphuang said:
This is quite interesting. I do hope we get more information on this. "The YJ-62 ASCM outperforms most Western and Russian anti-ship missiles in terms of range and warhead mass, thought it is not clear whether the missile possesses the same accuracy and anti-jamming capability"
this is definitely a good showing for this missile's accuracy and anti-jamming capability
There were two missiles foired, but one hit an Egyptian merchant vessel as I understand it.

This has ramifications world-wide, well beyond this conflict. You can bet analysts are looking at the data streams, on both sides of the equation, as we speak.

bd popeye said:
You know Jeff and Ute I was thinking the same thing for some time. It is just a matter of time before this thing escalates.

I have to wonder what sort of posture the Israeli ship was in at the moment of the attack? They should have been ready to repel the attack. That ship has the means to do so. If that were a USN ship that was hit like that without detecting the missile the CO would be relieved of duty..
Exactly. The fact that this ship was there at all (the IDF only has three) indicates they expected to have to defend their other gun ships which were shelling the coast against air attack. I am sure they were active and loaded for bear...yet they were defeated anyway. A ship designed for this specific purpose and arguably amongst the best Crovette size craft at this in the world.

The missile hit it in the stern, away from the Phalanx. That was no accident. It had to come in low and fast so the event horizon of the vessels radar had minimal time to warn and weapons systems had minimal time to react. A sophisticated engagement and I bet there were 'technicians" helping.

It emplys that the data link capabilities were either flawed, or that the other assetss did not pick up the threat. With US vessels, you would have AEW/AWACS data link, other vessels which were not targeted, etc. to provide more time. AEGIS is better, but Iran, and the Chinese system itself, may soon test that capability as well.

A huge coup for Hebollah, Iran, and Chinese systems. Heads in the IDF navy are going to roll over this...big time. Four sailors are dead, and one of their best AAW vessel is mission killed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Jeff Head said:
There were two missiles foired, but one hit an Egyptian merchant vessel as I understand it.

This has ramifications world-wide, well beyond this conflict. You can bet analysts are looking at the data streams, on both sides of the equation, as we speak.

Exactly. The fact that this ship was there at all (the IDF only has three) indicates they expected to have to defend their other gun ships which were shelling the coast against air attack. I am sure they were active and loaded for bear...yet they were defeated anyway. A ship designed for this specific purpose and arguably amongst the best Crovette size craft at this in the world.

The missile hit it in the stern, away from the Phalanx. That was no accident. It had to come in low and fast so the event horizon of the vessels radar had minimal time to warn and weapons systems had minimal time to react. A sophisticated engagement and I bet there were 'technicians" helping.

It emplys that the data link capabilities were either flawed, or that the other assetss did not pick up the threat. With US vessels, you would have AEW/AWACS data link, other vessels which were not targeted, etc. to provide more time. AEGIS is better, but Iran, and the Chinese system itself, may soon test that capability as well.

A huge coup for Hebollah, Iran, and Chinese systems. Heads in the IDF navy are going to roll over this...big time. Four sailors are dead, and one of their best AAW vessel is mission killed.
One thing that I'm wondering is that this actually signals that the missile had the capability to target a specific part of the ship rather than just the ship itself. It's something we didn't really think China was capable of before.

Another thing is that the supersonic AShM have been touted as the instrument to use to defeat modern AAW. But this is definitely a plus for subsonic AShM.
 
Top