Friday, April 17, 2026

Iranian Drone Carrier

The Iranian drone carrier, Shahid Bagheri, has been attacked and set afire by US forces and is, apparently, now burned out and grounded.
 
Setting aside the fate of the vessel, the ship offers some interesting thoughts for the US Navy.
 
The Shahid Bagheri represents Iran’s most significant naval aviation platform. The 40,000-ton vessel was commissioned in February 2025 after being converted from the Perarin, a South Korean-built container ship. Iranian engineers modified the hull to accommodate a 180-meter flight deck equipped with a ski-jump ramp for drone launches.
 
According to CENTCOM, the vessel had been operating as a “mothership” in the Gulf, serving as a floating launch platform for both unmanned aerial vehicles and ballistic missiles.[1]

Regardless of the actual capabilities of the vessel, it stands as an object lesson about the ease with which a run of the mill merchant ship can be converted into a drone carrier; something the US Navy could surely use, at least as a prototype for operational experience and doctrine and tactics development.
 
Such a carrier does not need to be the typical gold-plated monstrosity that the USN always tries to produce.  It can be a simple converted merchant ship which is exactly what Iran did with the Shahid Bagheri.  If Iran can do that, surely we can?  Against the scale of USN budgets, such a conversion would be nearly free.
 
The Navy seems committed to unmanned everything so why not acquire and convert a merchant ship as a drone carrier to gain operational experience and develop doctrine and tactics?
 
Heck, had they been thinking ahead, the Navy could have seized the Shahid Bagheri for our own use!  Iran was kind enough to do the conversion so why not take advantage of it?  What a great mission for a bunch of SEALs!  Well, too late now, I guess.
 
Iranian Drone Carrier

This is just idle thinking on my part.  The Navy is probably better off just building more Burkes.  We’re up to … what? … Flt 27 now?  Anything different, or experimental, or innovative would be too much of a risk for the Navy.
 
 
 
_____________________________________
 
[1]Naval News website, “CENTCOM Releases Footage Showing Strike on Iran’s Drone Carrier”, Tayfun Ozberk, 6-Mar-2026,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2026/03/centcom-releases-footage-showing-strike-on-irans-drone-carrier/

Posted by at
Labels: , ,

14 comments:

  1. G2milApril 17, 2026 at 9:51 AM

    Pentagon Disturbed as Its Fleet of Drones Is Left Bobbing in the Ocean When Elon Musk’s Starlink Fails

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pentagon-disturbed-fleet-drones-left-151009664.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousApril 17, 2026 at 10:56 PM

    Looking at the flighdeck, this ship should never called a flattop.

    In the early-1970's, the Navy tested the concept of a Sea Control Ship using the USS Guam (LPH-9) equipped with Harriers and helicopters for about 18 months. Surely, we could do the same with one of our LHAs or LHDs. If a long flightdeck isn't needed, an LPD or LSD should suffice. Alternatively, you could activate and convert a ship held in reserve.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsApril 18, 2026 at 6:17 AM

      " this ship should never called a flattop."

      So far, you're the only one who's made any reference to that!

      "we could do the same with one of our LHAs or LHDs. If a long flightdeck isn't needed, an LPD or LSD"

      Why??? They would be a hundred times overkill and "overcost". A throwaway merchant ship would be a much more suitable vessel and free to convert. All we're trying to do is launch small drones not large aircraft.

      Delete
    2. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 8:36 AM

      "A throwaway merchant ship would be a much more suitable vessel and free to convert."

      How so? Is there a recycle bin of throwaway ships that are free for the picking that you know about?

      You're going to have to spend some money on the ship and its conversion. We should make use what we already have before spending money unnecessarily.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 9:54 AM

      Merchant shipping is an element of national strategic power; using merchantmen to supplement naval power is old hat, but also long forgotten by the USN.

      WW2 merchant hulls and LSTs were used to launch and recover observation aircraft (e.g. Piper cubs) using the 'Brodie Landing system'. Those 4-5,000 ship invasion forces off Normandy and Okinawa were overwhelming composed of merchant ships conscripted for service. The Royal Navy adapted merchant hulls to serve as limited function 'transfer' aircraft carriers to transfer aircraft in the Falklands.

      The 'old guys' were clever and adaptable (they dreamed up most of what we have today); the potential is obvious.

      GAB

      Delete
    4. ComNavOpsApril 18, 2026 at 10:56 AM

      "Is there a recycle bin of throwaway ships that are free for the picking that you know about?"

      Setting aside the snark (which I won't do again), yes, there is. As a benchmark, a NEW 3000 TEU container ship goes for $25M-$50M. A used 3000 TEU vessel goes for $10M-$30M according to the latest Internet figures. Stepping up in size, a used Panamax 3000-10,000 TEU goes for $30M-$70M but that's probably vastly oversized for this application.

      Next time you comment, drop the snark and do a cursory bit of research first. Thank you.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 2:54 PM

      Apologies. Sometimes, I don't know my own snark.

      But, why spend $10-30 million on a ship and a few million (guess) more on the conversion when something like a Whidbey Island LSD is available? Their flight deck is 83 x 212 feet, which is a decent size. That would free up the $30 million to buy the drones you want to test.

      Delete
    6. ComNavOpsApril 18, 2026 at 3:42 PM

      "why spend $10-30 million on a ship and a few million (guess) more on the conversion when something like a Whidbey Island LSD is available?"

      Because the operating cost of an LSD would be a hundred times the operating cost of a small merchant ship. In addition, the Whidbey Island class is on the order of 40 yrs old. There's used (like ten yrs old or so by merchant ship standards) and then there's beat to hell and neglected like the forty year old Whidbey Island class.

      As far as maintenance, commercial parts are far more readily available then the often specialized Navy equipment especially when that equipment is forty years old and the parts are long since out of production and unavailable.

      There's also crew size. A small merchant ship requires a small crew, neglecting whatever crew is needed for the drone ops, specifically, whereas a LSD requires a much larger crew just to perform basic sailing operations.

      Delete
  3. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 7:59 AM

    We spend too much time and money trying to make the perfect solution for every problem when good enough will get the job done. We don't need to subtract from the number of ships in our inventory, we need a way to add more. A quick conversion with an expendable platform thatbis easily replaced seems smart move.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 8:27 AM

    "A throwaway merchant ship would be a much more suitable vessel..."

    I guess it depends on the intended usage.

    In my thinking, a drone carrier utilizing inexpensive ISR drones would be for providing extended situational awareness to surface groups that are away from friendly land-based air assets and not allocated any aircraft carriers.

    An example of that might be a cruiser surface group working in the Indian Ocean to interdict shipping.

    In that scenario, the drone carrier would need to operate within the battle group.
    If doing that, the carrier needs to have the speed to keep up with the group. And it would be assuming the same level of combat risk as the other ships.

    I would think that using a combat ship's hull as a starting point, and converting it to the drone carrier role, would make sense.

    Lutefisk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsApril 18, 2026 at 11:02 AM

      You're conflating missions and attempting to create a do-everything vessel. A drone carrier (not a Global Hawk size UAV carrier) would use Scan Eagle size drones for local (out to a couple hundred miles or so) surveillance. Such a vessel has no need to keep up with 30+ kt surface combat groups. Those ships should have their own drones. 99% of a ship's travel is at a slow cruising speed so a 15-20 kt vessel is fine. These carriers would be used for convoy escort surveillance, supporting a patrol group, monitoring chokepoints, etc. If we actually need a combat-worthy drone carrier with 30+ kt speed then we'll have to build one ... probably for a few billion dollars!

      Delete
  5. AnonymousApril 18, 2026 at 6:57 PM

    Think the old escort carriers my friends! Then you will understand where ComNavOps is trying to say.

    The initial ones were converted merchant ships, then early classes were built using Merchant hulls as a base. They did one thing mainly and that did it well. They were stamped out in great numbers.

    They were never meant to fight in fleet battles, The Battle off Samar is a good example of what they were NOT meant to be doing, which is why almost the entire time they were ALL sailing away as fast as they could go.

    - Loc

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousApril 20, 2026 at 12:23 PM

    Why not set up something like the "Q-ship containerized weapon system" https://www.hisutton.com/Chinese-Q-Ship.html China tested or is testing? With America's limited industrial and shipbuilding capacity- a problem that will require YEARS, if not DECADES to fix- building a specialized drone carrier is currently a waste of resources, imposing an opportunity cost better spent on ACTUAL warships. A containerized weapon system, on the other hand, imposes a lower opportunity cost; the US Navy just needs to get its hands on a Japanese or South Korean cargo ship, hire some PMCs to operate the ship while US Navy seamen operate the containerized weapons and sensors, pile on the aforementioned weapons and sensors...

    No, the Q-ship is NOT useful when facing enemy warships. But for "showing the flag," e.g., anti-piracy, anti-smuggling, or the "freedom of navigation" exercises on which the Navy is POINTLESSLY wearing away its WARSHIPS? It should be good enough, until we rebuild American industries and shipyards to provide the service with sufficient numbers of real WARSHIPS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ComNavOpsApril 20, 2026 at 12:34 PM

      A so-called Q-ship is absolutely absurd on today's naval battlefield. I've debunked this many times. Check the archives.

      "building a specialized drone carrier is currently a waste of resources"

      So far, you're the first person to call for building a specialized drone carrier. I've called for converting small merchant vessels. Relative to the Navy budget, it would be a free undertaking. Not being to Navy standards, any conventional shipyard could easily handle the conversion so it would have no impact on naval construction.

      "for "showing the flag," e.g., anti-piracy, anti-smuggling, or the "freedom of navigation"

      These tasks do not require drone carriers or heavily armed ships. Again, I've discussed this many times. Converted civilian yachts with a few machine guns would be more than adequate and, again, would be free relative to the Navy's budget.

      Delete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)