How Would Iran Attack the U.S. Navy in Strait of Hormuz

The largest risk with the blockade begins and ends with three clear combat realities, meaning suicide drones, mini-submarines and small boat attacks are the main weapons Iran would likely use to challenge the U.S. Navy blockade in Strait of Hormuz. Ballistic missiles would be easily tracked and intercepted by warships, and Iran has no more Navy or Air Force with which to mount an attack on the U.S. Navy. 

 U.S. Navy warships are armed with an integrated system called Aegis Combat System, a technology which uses radar, command and control and ship-fired interceptors to track and destroy incoming ballistic missile attacks from the ocean. Aegis radar proved extremely successful in the Red Sea when U.S. Navy ships were attacked by Houthi drones and cruise missiles, as the Navy operated with a “perfect” defensive record. Some commercial ships were hit, but no missiles landed on U.S. Navy ships, and the service has now rapidly integrated new drone-defense weapons for maritime combat. 

Iranian Shahed Drone Swarms

The threat with Shahed drones reside mostly in the concept of swarm, meaning a single suicide drone is very likely to be “seen” from air, ground and surface ship sensors and be intercepted or destroyed. A number of drones all traveling together toward a specific target, however, are intended to “overwhelm” U.S. Navy ship defenses and “blanket” an area with attacks. The strategy is one of pure volume and vectors, meaning there could be so many simultaneous angles of attack that defenses simply cannot counter all of them at one time. This would likely be a strategy Iran might use to destabilize or break the U.S. Navy blockade. Iran would not likely seek to destroy or disable the U.S. Navy, as that is not realistic, yet they may seek to cause enough damage to U.S. Navy ships and personnel to create casualties, chaos and domestic political unrest within the U.S. The Iranian strategy is likely a mere question of time, meaning time itself is being used as a weapon of war. Iran may simply wish to survive long enough to outlast U.S. political and military resolve. Hitting warships with drones and causing casualties would be a strategic attempt to erode U.S. political support for the Iranian war effort enough to create a withdrawal and claim victory. 

Iranian Small Boat Attacks

This strategy would be similar in the case of small boat swarming attacks. While many of them have been destroyed from the air during Operation Epic Fury, Iran is known to have underground cities filled with small, armed fast boats able to fire weapons or be filled with explosives.  In a manner similar to aerial drones, swarming small boats could seek to overwhelm defenses and perhaps explode into the side of a warship. U.S. Navy layered defenses, however, have been used in combat and extensively prepared for these kinds of maritime combat scenarios. Sailors have for years been training with an integrated series of sensors, interceptors and deck-mounted weapons to “see” and “destroy” groups of small boats from stand-off distances where they cannot threaten warships. 

Should Iran have the ability to launch a massive salvo of aerial and boat swarm attacks simultaneously, it seems possible that U.S. Navy warships could be damaged, yet that is very much only a possibility, as the service’s defenses have performed consistently well in combat. 

Iranian Mini-Subs

Iran does have a few diesel electric submarines and possibly as many as 30 small “mini-subs” capable of being filled with explosives and attacking U.S. Navy ships. It may not be clear how “guided” these mini-subs are or what kinds of weapons they may contain, yet it seems they could present a credible threat to surface ships. However, not only do U.S. Navy warships operate with towed array sonar and helicopter dropped sonobuoys, but the U.S. Navy’s carrier strike groups are almost certain to be supported by submarines and U.S. Navy undersea drones capable of mapping and tracking undersea coastal areas in the Strait of Hormuz. Much like drones and small boats, the highest risk with these kinds of weapons would relate to a question of “mass” or “volume,” meaning how many of them might be able to attack at one time. Since there are only reported to be roughly 25 to 30 of these minisubs, they are not likely to create a lasting threat in the Strait. 

Marine Corps MADIS

There is another critical tactic now in place on U.S. Navy aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships, and it involves the U.S. Marines using tactical combat vehicles on the deck of warships to conduct counter-drone operations. Small tactical vehicles are now integrated with a system called Marine Air Defense Integrated System (MADIS), a suite of counter drone technologies positioned around the perimeter of the ship deck to track incoming drones and drone swarms; MADIS uses electronic warfare, advanced sensors and heat-seeking, shoulder launched Stinger missiles to counter enemy drones, helicopters and low-flying fixed wing aircraft.  These Marine units add an additional layer of drone swarm protection to surface ships as they increase both surveillance and countermeasures from the deck of a ship. 

Island Hopping? 

An unknown “x” factor in all of this is the prospect of some kind of amphibious operation; the USS Tripoli is also in the Gulf with 2,000 Marines, Osprey tiltrotors and F-35Bs all in position to support some kind of sea-air-land incursion in case they were ordered to seize and hold some island territory. With undersea unmanned systems, surface drones, a protective envelope provided by Aegis-radar on destroyers, air support and suppressive fire from large warships, it seems conceivable that an amphibious force could perform some kind of limited “island hopping” or amphibious operation. 

Kris Osborn is the Military Technology Editor of 1945. Osborn is also President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University