• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-nuclear-powered-war-ships-response-us-sanctions-a7471566.html

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-to-build-nuclear-powered-ships-after-us-breaches-atomic-deal/

This is likely to deadend very quickly (assuming that it's serious in the first place), since little if any of the Islamic Republic's nuclear effort up until now has touched on naval reactors. And that's not even taking into account the status of the navy. During the time of the Shah of course it was all a different story, but any traces of that effort have long since been lost.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,355
Reaction score
221
Iran is prone to making these sort of wild claims, entirely for domestic and regional consumption. I put this in the same boat as their "copies" of the RQ-170, their indigenous "stealth fighter," and their "state of the art" destroyers.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,332
Reaction score
79
IIRC, there's an exemption in the NPT for HEU intended for naval reactors.
 

r16

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
375
Reaction score
6
not making much effort on the subject , though ı have seen this described as nuclear propulsion of missiles in a TV debate , no doubt an error as people were discussing a lot of things at the same time .
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
In June 2012, an Iranian official asserted that scientists were in "the initial phases of manufacturing atomic submarines." [15] They claimed Iran's success in retrofitting one of the imported Kilo-class submarines (after Russia had declined to do so) was evidence of the country's advancing submarine development capability despite delays. [16] In September 2017, Iran’s naval command said that the country’s nuclear agency was beginning to produce nuclear reactors for fueling and propulsion systems. [17] However, many analysts assert that manufacturing a nuclear reactor for submarine use is beyond Iran’s current capabilities and is simply a response to increased U.S. sanctions after the U.S. withdrawal from the JPCOA. [18]
[15] "Iran Plans to Build Nuclear-Fueled Submarines," Fars News Agency, 12 June 2012, http://english.farsnews.com; "Iran to Make Engine Systems for Nuclear Submarines," BBC Monitoring Trans Caucasus Unit, 12 June 2012, www.lexisnexis.com.
[16] "Iran Plans to Build Nuclear-Fueled Submarines," Fars News Agency, 12 June 2012, http://english.farsnews.com; Jeremy Binnie, "Iran Relaunches 'Kilo' Submarine," Jane's Defence Weekly, 6 June 2012, www.lexisnexis.com.
[17] Callum Paton, "Tehran Plans to Build Nuclear Submarines despite U.S. Warnings," Newsweek, 23 February 2018, www.newsweek.com.

Nuclear-powered vessels: In June 2012, the Iranian navy announced that it was considering construction of nuclear-powered submarines. Shortly afterward, Tehran stated that it was also considering nuclear-powered oil tankers. Although naval reactors typically use high-enriched uranium (HEU) as a fuel in order to reduce reactor size (e.g., U.S. Navy submarines use 97 percent HEU, and Russian icebreakers up to 75 percent), there have been exceptions. The French navy uses low-enriched uranium (LEU) "caramel" fuel (around 7.5 percent) in its submarines, enabling it to enrich and manufacture fuel rods at its civilian plants. Brazil’s planned nuclear submarine is also expected to use LEU fuel. Experimental merchant ships such as the Savannah (U.S.), Otto Hahn (Germany), and Mutsu ( Japan) used LEU fuel, but they no longer exist. In terms of international nuclear safeguards, the issue is complicated. Non-nuclear weapon states with a Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement are allowed to remove certain material from IAEA safeguards—in this case, nuclear material intended for nonproscribed military use such as submarine fuel can be exempted under arrangements reached with the agency.
 
Last edited:

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
Nuclear weapons require sophisticated targeting and delivery systems. At the present, with years of sanctions in place, the regular Iranian Navy and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) counterpart have been forced to innovate, rather successfully, in domestically enhancing maritime nuclear warfare capabilities. In January 1975, however, the shah sought to purchase such nuclear-capable technology. Seeking to push through a deal for nuclear submarines from France, Iranian negotiators even claimed the administration in Washington had “been hinting that the U. S. might sell them.” US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger learned of this from French Presidential Secretary General Pierre Brousalette. Understandably concerned, Kissinger responded pointedly and repeatedly that the Iranian claim was “inconceivable … I’m 99.9% sure.” Purchasing nuclear submarines would violate the multi-billion dollar US-Iran arms agreement forged in May 1972 when President Richard Nixon allowed the shah to acquire any weapons he wished from the US short of nuclear weapons and associated technology.

Presumably the SSNs involved would have been of the Rubis-class.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,791
Reaction score
382
Nuclear weapons require sophisticated targeting and delivery systems. At the present, with years of sanctions in place, the regular Iranian Navy and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) counterpart have been forced to innovate, rather successfully, in domestically enhancing maritime nuclear warfare capabilities. In January 1975, however, the shah sought to purchase such nuclear-capable technology. Seeking to push through a deal for nuclear submarines from France, Iranian negotiators even claimed the administration in Washington had “been hinting that the U. S. might sell them.” US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger learned of this from French Presidential Secretary General Pierre Brousalette. Understandably concerned, Kissinger responded pointedly and repeatedly that the Iranian claim was “inconceivable … I’m 99.9% sure.” Purchasing nuclear submarines would violate the multi-billion dollar US-Iran arms agreement forged in May 1972 when President Richard Nixon allowed the shah to acquire any weapons he wished from the US short of nuclear weapons and associated technology.

Presumably the SSNs involved would have been of the Rubis-class.
Later France paid the price of blood to its nuclear partnership with Iran... France created the Eurodif joint nuclear consortia with 10% iranian shares, led by George Besse... who (coincidence ?) was shot dead in November 1986 by Action Directe terrorists.. just after Paris was rocked by terrorist ( = iranian) attacks that left 20 dead.

Basically the nuclear agreement with the Shah was blocked after the fanatics overthrew him... and they avenged.
 
Last edited:

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
Interestingly, the Shah was also very interested in procuring at least six Aegis equipped Virginia-class DLGNs (CGNs post-1975). This requirement was not blocked by the 1972 deal due to a loophole, possibly related to behind the scenes additional funding of both the Virginia and Aegis programs by the Shah. The Carter administration was however dead set against any such procurement, which may be one of the reasons why it sabotaged the Virginia program. The Kouroush (Kidd) class, originally a six ship class (reduced to four because Congress wouldn't approve cutting back on the US Navy's initial 30 ship Spruance buy to free up building slots), was in part intended as a stepping stone towards acquiring the CGNs.

It seems likely that the IIN would have procured an initial four Provence-class (as the Rubis-class was initially known) SSNs in order to ensure that at least one would be available for patrol duties at any one time. It was probably planned to base them at Chah Bahar, on the Gulf of Oman.
 
Last edited:

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
560
With regards as to the Kouroush class, I came across an old CIA report from 1976 that mentions it was actually the Shah that cancelled the last two ships in the class in January of that year after the USN informed the IIN about a major unexpected program cost spike in late 1975 (from approximately $1.47 billion to around $2 billion dollars). Of course, that spike could have come about because of Congress' refusal to free up those two building slots but the report doesn't say.
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
427
Yes, I thought it was the Iranian's themselves who cancelled the last two, in fact I don't think they were even ordered formally before cancellation.
 
Top