A
Thanks but I don't understand Turkish and from what you have said, I think I don't miss that much since I am following Iran's missile program quite closely
Iran Unveils New Homegrown Multiple Ballistic ‘Missile Gun’
- Thread starter TR_123456
- Start date
A
I would like to add that in the recent showcase of the IRGC missile and military exhibition there was an exhibition of the missile guidance evolution in Iran. It started with large, heavy and bulky electro-mechanical guidance computers used in the early missiles and ended with a handpalm sized INS systems in Iran's latest missiles. I remembered that I once saw a Turkish INS system in a promotion video with Ismail Demir which was just as small as Iran's latest INS.
Turkey is not that far behind Iran's missile technology. And with the recent Erdogan visit of a Roketsan facility showcase we could see Carbon composite filament winding rocket boosters, and a flexible nozzle for solid-fuel missiles.
Turkey is not that far behind Iran's missile technology. And with the recent Erdogan visit of a Roketsan facility showcase we could see Carbon composite filament winding rocket boosters, and a flexible nozzle for solid-fuel missiles.
E
Satellites in low earth orbits do not stay above any location on Earth for long.
Hard to track aircraft with such satellites. Only fixed structures can be shot with those cubesats.
A single cubesat maybe good enough for espionage on let's say, a secret nuclear reactor or other secretive locations.
Not good enough for real time tracking of aircrafts.
E
Arda Mevlütoğlu and Dr. Sıtkı Egeli's evaluations on Iran's ballistic missile and cruise missile programs. Those who know Turkish should listen. Let them tell those who do not know.
A brief summary would be highly appreciated.
For non Turkish speakers like us.
E
E
Two potential objectives
1. Fish for more information by intentionally provoking Iranians
2. Assuage American public, American allies in the region so that they do not panic.
- Messages
- 808
- Solutions
- 1
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I rephrased saying "chemical weapons are poor man's atomic bomb". It does not mean that rich countries cant have chemical weapons. In act nuclear powers still had chemical weapon stocks. But it was not their prime weapon.
Iran's air force is terribly weak for their country size. That's why they heavily invest in ballistic missiles.
E
Ballistic missiles are also, arguably, harder to intercept and provide for no potential loss of pilot in case they are shot down.
Fighter jets are useful in a wider variety of operations than ballistic missiles and allow for easier domination over unarmed civilians or poorly armed militias or other non-state actors.
As a developing country that is yet to master various critical technologies used in civilian and defense industries, Iran can not expect to surpass the USA in aerospace technologies for the foreseeable future. Given the imbalance in populations (Iran with only 80 million or so and the USA with well over 320 million), the number of allies and the expertise that the respective alliances bring to the table, no feasible plan for denying USAF air superiority over Iran in case of a conventional conflict is probably within Iran's reach.
Asymmetric means, including the development, acquisition and/or production of nuclear weapons and delivery systems like ICBMS, are the only possible means of deterring the USA for a much smaller country like Iran.
We note that Israel, too, has developed and stockpiled nuclear weapons despite having an air force that retains qualitative edge over all regional countries including Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, UAE, Qatar, Pakistan, Greece, Kuwait or the likes.
The reasons should be obvious. An Air Force is useful only under certain circumstances. However, nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems like ICBMS are a whole another ballgame. Pakistan has never developed or tested an ICBM and it is for this reason that the USA could threaten to bomb Pakistan back to the stone age.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un never received quite the same threats ever since he tested nuclear weapons and the associated delivery systems such as inter continental ranged ballistic missiles.
- Messages
- 808
- Solutions
- 1
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
If you have 100 F-16s you can make easily 3,000 sorties in a month delivering some 6,000 tons of ammo.
With 100 ballistic missiles u can only deliver 100 t.
Plus with air force u can achieve air superiority, CAS, anti ship and so on.
Israel spends on ballistic missiles very small amount compare to its air force. There are about 100 ballistic missiles which were produced long time ago and stored in silos since then.
Shah Iran had one of the strongest air forces in ME if not the strongest. Today Iran has air force on pair with Syria.
- Messages
- 808
- Solutions
- 1
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
That's total nonsense. All Israeli planes are located in protected concrete shelters. Israel has Arrow-2 and Arrow-3 missile defence and number of long range ballistic missiles is very limited.
A
Don't you know what the released energy is of a 500+kg warhead impacting at mach 6+?
The amount of ABM is limited compared to the amount of 1100km+ range ballistic missiles that Iran has. The amount of ballistic missiles that can reach Israel from Iran is in the multiple thousands, and with the recently unveiled Qasem Soleimani endo-atmospheric tactical solid-fuel ballistic missile, Israeli ABM has virtually no chance of intercepting the majority of them.
Those ABM systems rely on radar which can be taken out by anti-radiation drones, something that Iran has supplied Hezbollah by now.
Like I said, Israel can only meaningfully retaliate by nukes.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 808
- Solutions
- 1
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
1) You will need a ballistic missile per shelter.
2) 1100+ km range ballistic missiles are extremely expensive. Iran cant afford many of them. In fact no country can. Thats why without nuclear warheads they dont make much sense.
3) Solid fuel does not make a missile harder to intercept.
4) Hezbollah drones have no any chance to each Israeli bases deep inside.
I am sorry but you read too much Iranian propaganda.
- Messages
- 2,164
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
We did saw what Iran did against American bases in Iraq, how many did they shoot 20 and no dead from American side. Ooo not to forget they had headeache.
Long range ballistic missile in Iraq and Iran war was nothing but killing civillians. When a BM gets long range it will have more error with accuracy.
Long range ballistic missile in Iraq and Iran war was nothing but killing civillians. When a BM gets long range it will have more error with accuracy.
A
This statement shows how little you know about Iran's ballistic missile bases.
Iran's path to a second strike capability
The concept Interpretation of Irans new basing concept Non-nuclear states can have the highest conventional military capability but are alwa...
patarames.blogspot.com
Not for the Iranians. The Sejil (solid-fuel 2000km) was the most expensive BM in Iran's at $400000. The Fateh's are $100000 and the recent Raad-500 is $50000
The new QS ballistic missile has a high burn-out speed and doesn't leave the atmosphere. Arrow-3 only intercepts exo-atmospheric BM's. This missile flies a depressed trajectory at mach 10-12 with enough reserves for terminal maneuvering to evade Patriot, Arrow-2 and David Sling.
Haj Qasem missile: Entering the hypersonic club
Haj Qasem hypersonic missile, named after major general Qasem Soleymani Per definition, many ballistic missile systems could be called hype...
patarames.blogspot.com
Look at Abqaiq attack, that should tell you enough.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Messages
- 808
- Solutions
- 1
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
The cost of long range ballistic missiles is comparable to cost of space vehicles. In fact Iranian Safir space launcher is a modified Shahab-3. Now lets see how many launches of Safir we had at all:
8 launches in 12 years. 4 of them failed. And you are trying to say that Iran has 100500 long range ballistic rockets?
The rocket engine shuts down after couple minutes. If you don't leave the atmosphere ur missile will fall very soon after shutting down the engine. Sorry but you read too much mullah propaganda.
- Messages
- 5,502
- Solutions
- 2
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Ballistic missiles follows a predictable route, easily detected when launched can be easily intercepted in mid-flight (actually pretty weak in mid-flight or re-entry because they cant maneuver much and relies on projectile trajectory) if a country has got proper AD and AMD systems it is possible to detect and stop them.
Also their accuracy is questionable, it depends on the technology of the producer.
Without a nuclear warhead we have seen how much damage those can deliver in Karabakh, normal explosives are not capable of taking out runways or aiming at pin-point bunkers.
In a case involving exchange of ballistic missiles we know which side is more capable of intercepting those, if not majority of those missiles.
If Ballistic missiles were that awesome, US wouldn't put burden on Airforce in invasion of Iraq.
A
Just one video of the former director of Israels ABM program answers your questions:
This is a video from more than 5 years ago. In the mean time Iran has developed and is producing Khorramshar-1/2 missile:
"New video from the moment the #Khorramshahr ballistic missile hit a target with dimensions of 40 by 40 meters in the central desert. #Khorramshahr_Model with a range of 2,000 square kilometers can carry several warheads weighing up to 1,800 kilograms and is therefore the most powerful ballistic missile made in Iran."
Last edited by a moderator:
E
Assuming none of them would be shot down.
That is a very brave assumption.
The costs of procuring, maintaining and arming an F-16 along with training maintenance personnel and pilots should be considerably greater than the costs of training personnel for maintaining and launching ballistic missiles and for procuring ballistic missiles. Some of the latter tasks can also be automated with improvements in AI and automation.
If you consider the lifetime costs of 100 F-16 along with pilot training cost, maintenance costs, munitions cost, fuel cost and adjust it for expected number of F-16 fighter jets that can be shot down and the losses incurred once F-16 fighter jets are shot down, then you would find more than 5,000 ballistic missiles can be procured and maintained for the same costs.
Remember that cost per unit falls as production number rises. As more and more ballistic missiles, or any other type of weapons, are produced, the cost per ballistic missile (or any other type of weapon) will fall.
The same happens with the F-35 fighter jet, for example.
Economy of scale.
E
I wonder where you got these numbers from. Just curious. On top of that, Iran's national currency is not the US$. Given that the Iranian rial/toman has depreciated against the US$ in recent years by a significant percent, I doubt you can cite a fixed US$ value for the price of any model of Iranian ballistic missile.
Besides, Iran is a country of tremendous potential with immense natural resource reserves. On the order of tens of trillions, if not hundreds of trillions. Certainly, apart from mismanagement and corruption, there is also the issue of lack of sufficient mastery of numerous civilian and military technologies that forces Iran to sign the JCPOA.
If Iranians were actually able to develop the numerous high tech products that their regime mouthpieces blaring day in, day out would have you believe, then no amount of sanctions or embargo would hurt Iran the slightest bit. Considering the tremendous natural resources, land, water, natural attractions and history of Iran, it should be obvious that despite repeated and frequent boastful propaganda, Iranians have not yet been able to master really high end technologies.
Their primary export item, much like their Arab neighbours ruled by dictators, is hydrocarbons. They can not even develop their own hydrocarbon reserves without foreign assistance.
Given the Iranian reaction after Trump ordered assassination of Qasem Soleimani, there is little reason to believe in Iranian pompous or boastful claims of magnificent weapons technologies or grand technological breakthroughs.
I remember many Iranians were boasting how Iran, by 2018, were going to be the 4th most prolific publishers of scientific and technology papers in international journals.
All of that based on an unreliable 'forecast':
http://www.scimagolab.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/forecasting-excercise.pdf
It's almost the end of 2020. That forecast is yet to be realized. If it comes to pass and Iranian reaction for the murder of Qasem Soleimani results in greater loss to the United States, in strictly military terms, than I would be very glad to revisit my opinion on Iranian unwarranted bragging.
They even bragged about sending astronauts to space by 2015. And later shifted the date to 2018.
https://en.mehrnews.com/news/53960/Iran-to-send-astronaut-to-space-by-2015
Iran to send astronaut to space by 2015
