What's new

Iran is learning from Russia’s use of missiles in Ukraine

may you link a thread to your integrated radar and air defense system combinations?
Sure.
 
Many times perhaps. But look at the history of the IRIAF. It has taken us two decades to go from Azaraskh to Kowsar. And how many Kowsars have been built? Not even 5.

All are moving towards AI based UCAVs.
 
All are moving towards AI based UCAVs.
Yes, I don't disagree with that as a statement which is true about future.
But the problem is how much armaments a UCAV can carry as of today and how it can perform in a dog fight. Other than that, there's no doubt that future belongs to unmanned systems.
 
With a skim look on the network a full network with advanced seekers and the capability to avoid jamming and countermeasures is lackin in the iranian air defence. Bavar 373 is an odd case with questionable range and almost identical speeds to the S-300 with less missiles per battery and a fancy external covering. If you are kind enough to point out the short range medium ranged capabilities to counter excessive aerial or MLRS bombardment on troops? Or can the bavar alone survive an aerial attack with smart gliding munitions launches in the hundreds from a single squadron?
 
Yes, I don't disagree with that as a statement which is true about future.
But the problem is how much armaments a UCAV can carry as of today and how it can perform in a dog fight. Other than that, there's no doubt that future belongs to unmanned systems.

I dont think that there will be much dogfights in future. It will be more like "bring the missile into range and avoid enemies missile". Whereas good AI sure also can do dogfight with 12+ g. But why should it? And with what guns?
 
With a skim look on the network a full network with advanced seekers and the capability to avoid jamming and countermeasures is lackin in the iranian air defence. Bavar 373 is an odd case with questionable range and almost identical speeds to the S-300 with less missiles per battery and a fancy external covering. If you are kind enough to point out the short range medium ranged capabilities to counter excessive aerial or MLRS bombardment on troops? Or can the bavar alone survive an aerial attack with smart gliding munitions launches in the hundreds from a single squadron?
LOLs at the bold part.
Off the top of my head, check these systems for short/medium range:
Khordad-15
Khordad-3
Raad 1 & 2
Ya Zahra
Mersad
Zoubin

There are many more systems. And then you should check our radars too, including OTH radars that cover the entire MENA and Eastern Europe. Check the thread if you are seriously interested in the subject. It's not something that you can give it a skim look and then form an opinion and discuss it. We are not talking about the AD systems that the Egyptian military produces, with all due respect.

I dont think that there will be much dogfights in future. It will be more like "bring the missile into range and avoid enemies missile". Whereas good AI sure also can do dogfight with 12+ g. But why should it? And with what guns?
Yeah, but what are we going to do until then? Plus, you talk as if it's going to make a difference for us. Our problem with jet fighters is not about having a pilot, but it's about engine technology. And that problem will be transferred to large UCAVs that can replace jet fighters as well.
 
Not a comment rooted in reality. Should probably check the actual stats on the conflict.

Russian Air Force is running 200+ sorties/ day plus the attack helicopter raids by Aligators and Hinds.

Many of the “missiles” are actually CMs being launched by warships and soviet era bombers, not BMs.

Being a one trick pony rather than a well rounded military is never a good idea. Not sure why people can’t understand that.

Indeed, can't rely on missiles to win wars, but they certainly make things very difficult for your opponent. Ukraine has unprecedented international support and can use their assistance to replace losses, but imagine how much more difficult it would be for Russia if they had no means of long range strike.

Thankfully, these guys understood that and the purpose of such large investment in UAVs and UAS is to follow up. Still need aircraft and well rounded military.

its really a shame when you cant provide aircover to your troops and have your missile sites destroyed by aircraft and your troops obliterated
who?
 
its really a shame when you cant provide aircover to your troops and have your missile sites destroyed by aircraft and your troops obliterated
No. Completely different missions. Cruise missiles can’t take and hold terrain, they can’t support infantry, they’re of limited use for fighting other tanks, and they can’t conduct recon/patrols, etc etc. Cruise missiles are useful for reliable and low-risk destruction of specific pre-chosen targets, potentially at very long range in uncontrolled territory, but that’s pretty much all they do.
Well I don't know where you guys have been for the last few years, but considering Iran has no desire to invade foreign countries in seize territory, I'd like to see how you think we give a shit about providing CAS to troops that are not fighting.

@kingQamaR It turns out Iran's main enemies don't even border the country. What you are saying has no pertinence to Iran. This country is not fighting tank wars with Isreal. This is why missiles are important to Iran, its use and costs. Literally the point of the article.

Egyptian airforce would be rendered useless in a near-pear conflict, if you think it'd fair any different than Russia, then i don't know what to tell you. You should know from those last 2 wars.
 
Yeah, but what are we going to do until then? Plus, you talk as if it's going to make a difference for us. Our problem with jet fighters is not about having a pilot, but it's about engine technology. And that problem will be transferred to large UCAVs that can replace jet fighters as well.

Due to Ukraine-Russian war Iran gets minimum additional 5 years. A UCAV will be much lighter than a manned fighter jet. So me is confident that Iran will success with the needed engine for such a UCAV within a decade.
 
Well I don't know where you guys have been for the last few years, but considering Iran has no desire to invade foreign countries in seize territory, I'd like to see how you think we give a shit about providing CAS to troops that are not fighting.

@kingQamaR It turns out Iran's main enemies don't even border the country. What you are saying has no pertinence to Iran. This country is not fighting tank wars with Isreal. This is why missiles are important to Iran, its use and costs. Literally the point of the article.

Egyptian airforce would be rendered useless in a near-pear conflict, if you think it'd fair any different than Russia, then i don't know what to tell you. You should know from those last 2 wars.

We've yet to see just how well Iran's missile-centric strategy will fare in a real-time/real world engagement with presumably Israel which would represent the hardest test given range and relative ABM capabilities. -- I'm hoping IRGC's efforts to spread out and arm various allies in the region in order to move closer weapons that will hit targets in Zio-land, will prove largely fruitful as relying on launches just from Iranian soil might not be the best idea given sheer distance to targets. Stockpile isn't an issue, we know Iran has thousands upon thousands of missiles and PGM weapons ready to go. I also hope Iran has built many LACMs/Suicide drones as well.

My own opinion: I don't think the current Iranian strategy is so much focused on "winning" a war but more centered around coming out on top in a short high-intensity conflict. Missiles take time to produce and in a war environment, those production facilities will be amongst the first to get hit reducing replacement rates for BMs (well they'll try to hit them since a good amount have been moved underground). Better to hit your enemy so fucking hard in the first days and weeks that any negotiations or reality that comes after the dust settles, favors you immensely.
 
Last edited:
Due to Ukraine-Russian war Iran gets minimum additional 5 years. A UCAV will be much lighter than a manned fighter jet. So me is confident that Iran will success with the needed engine for such a UCAV within a decade.
What about strategic bombers? Can you guarantee that Iran will never need them in the next 30 years?

The US has over 700+ B-52 bombers and I cannot imagine Iran building even a single one without foreign help in the next 3 decades. The US will continue to operate its B-52 fleet until 2050.

Iran needs to learn from others. There's no shame in that. We need to work with anyone who is willing to work with us at any cost to make meaningful progress in the engine technology.
 
Only if you limited your thinking. Imagine if the drone already is in target(s) area, begin to designate when MIRV comes in.

MARVs do mid course adjustments at high altitude.

Might be possible with a quasi BM small missile like F-110 family. They already have Fateh Mobin using infrared homing.

 
My own opinion: I don't think the current Iranian strategy is so much focused on "winning" a war but more centered around coming out on top in a short high-intensity conflict. Missiles take time to produce and in a war environment, these production facilities will be amongst the first to get hit reducing replacement rates for BMs. Better to hit your enemy so fucking hard in the first days and weeks that any negotiations or reality that comes after the dust settles, favors you immensely.
Exactly. If the war gets prolonged, it will become increasingly more difficult for us without a reliable air force.
 
What about strategic bombers? Can you guarantee that Iran will never need them in the next 30 years?

The US has over 700+ B-52 bombers and I cannot imagine Iran building even a single one without foreign help in the next 3 decades. The US will continue to operate its B-52 fleet until 2050.

Iran needs to learn from others. There's no shame in that. We need to work with anyone who is willing to work with us at any cost to make meaningful progress in the engine technology.

This is where Iranian doctrine conflicts with what we perceive to be the more optimal path given our reference point (American air-centric Power).

idk which one is better for Iranian needs given all relevant circumstances.
 
This is where Iranian doctrine conflicts with what we perceive to be the more optimal path given our reference point (American air-centric Power).

idk which one is better for Iranian needs given all relevant circumstances.
Iran's doctrine is out of necessity. We can't build a powerful air force, so we have to rely on our missiles.
Our case is a perfect example of the law of the instrument.
The US has exceled in both fields (jet fighters and missiles) and it has chosen the former for obvious reasons.
 

Back
Top Bottom